5 ms·

I don't know what qualifies as "mainstream media" here, but I feel various public broadcasters have served me well over the years: CBC[0] in Canada, BBC[1] in U

by bch 2mo ago

I don't know what qualifies as "mainstream media" here, but I feel various public broadcasters have served me well over the years: CBC[0] in Canada, BBC[1] in United Kingdom, NPR[2] in America, ABC[3] in Australia, NHK[4] in Japan... switching around the world also gives reprieve from local politics letting you tune into someone else's local politics practically recreationally, which seems more and more necessary in the modern world of today. Streaming radio is one of the best things about the contemporary internet. [0] https://cbc.ca/ https://cbc.ca/ [1] https://bbc.com/ https://bbc.com/ [2] https://npr.org/ https://npr.org/ [3] https://www.abc.net.au/ https://www.abc.net.au/ [4] https://www.nhk.or.jp/ https://www.nhk.or.jp/

daniel_iversen 2mo ago
The ABC in Australia feels so opinionated and tilted to the “left” side of politics whenever I’ve watched it on the TV. And it may just have been that news show or the specific host but it makes it not enjoyable to watch when it seems there’s always an “angle” and negative undertones and people constantly having an axe to grind. I’d personally like a bit more neutral news that also leans a little more on the positive and inspiring side.
- SturgeonsLaw 2mo ago
  It's "just a blog", but if you're after positive and uplifting, that does exist https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/ https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/ I like to check this every so often as a palette cleanser for the endless bad news that is available elsewhere
- protocolture 2mo ago
  >The ABC in Australia feels so opinionated and tilted to the “left” side of politics whenever I’ve watched it on the TV. And it may just have been that news show or the specific host but it makes it not enjoyable to watch when it seems there’s always an “angle” and negative undertones and people constantly having an axe to grind. I’d personally like a bit more neutral news that also leans a little more on the positive and inspiring side. I dont see any bias in their journalism, but they have a tendency to just accept everything at face value. They will also shop around for experts that support their opinions. One person will write an article about housing referring to housing experts, and get one view, and then a few years later another will instead quote a public housing expert getting another view. Theres never any "Lets test the quality of each expert and try and figure out whats true" 4 corners and foreign correspondant however are still absolute top tier journalism. Its a shame they dont apply those standards everywhere.
  - throwawaythekey 2mo ago
    The ABC are sadly incredibly biased. A recent, prominent example is [1] where they edited footage to make it look like a soldier was shooting at an innocent civilian. They then appointed a 40 year abc/sbs veteran to investigate the incident who unsurprisingly found no wrong doing. All of this on a topic that isn't even super political... Granted they are still probably the best journalists in the country, but when you can't trust them to not alter primary evidence, or admit real fault when something has gone wrong, you cant really trust them for much. For day to day stuff I still find them an ok source, it just needs to be taken with a very heavy dose of salt. [1] https://7news.com.au/spotlight/7news-spotlight-abc-launches-investigation-over-extra-gunshots-in-video-of-ex-commando-heston-russells-november-platoon-c-16050778 https://7news.com.au/spotlight/7news-spotlight-abc-launches-...
    - protocolture 2mo ago
      Their biggest fault was giving back the filing cabinet. >where they edited footage to make it look like a soldier was shooting at an innocent civilian. In your link the ABC is claiming the footage wasnt edited by them. I mean its still a bit of weak journalism to publish it. Did that ever get resolved either way?
      - throwawaythekey 2mo ago
        > In your link the ABC is claiming the footage wasnt edited by them. I'll admit I don't fully understand what they were claiming/how it changed over time but they later issued an apology for the incident [1]. From what I can work out the thrust of the abc claim is "don't blame our journalists, the editors on multiple occasions accidentally did this for no reason at all and we then failed to catch it". Then midway through the apology they pivot to blaming twitter, or at least that is the flow of the guardian article. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/sep/17/abc-australion-troops-afghanistan-helicopter-footage-editing-ntwnfb https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/sep/17/abc-australion...
apparent 2mo ago
I used to listen to and read NPR. Since about 2015 they've been slipping, and at an increasing rate. After submitting several corrections, none of which were heeded, I have stopped taking them seriously. An outlet that does not correct clear-cut falsehoods is peddling a narrative, not reporting news.

by bch 2mo ago

daniel_iversen 2mo ago

The ABC in Australia feels so opinionated and tilted to the “left” side of politics whenever I’ve watched it on the TV. And it may just have been that news show or the specific host but it makes it not enjoyable to watch when it seems there’s always an “angle” and negative undertones and people constantly having an axe to grind. I’d personally like a bit more neutral news that also leans a little more on the positive and inspiring side.

SturgeonsLaw 2mo ago
It's "just a blog", but if you're after positive and uplifting, that does exist https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/ https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/ I like to check this every so often as a palette cleanser for the endless bad news that is available elsewhere
protocolture 2mo ago
>The ABC in Australia feels so opinionated and tilted to the “left” side of politics whenever I’ve watched it on the TV. And it may just have been that news show or the specific host but it makes it not enjoyable to watch when it seems there’s always an “angle” and negative undertones and people constantly having an axe to grind. I’d personally like a bit more neutral news that also leans a little more on the positive and inspiring side. I dont see any bias in their journalism, but they have a tendency to just accept everything at face value. They will also shop around for experts that support their opinions. One person will write an article about housing referring to housing experts, and get one view, and then a few years later another will instead quote a public housing expert getting another view. Theres never any "Lets test the quality of each expert and try and figure out whats true" 4 corners and foreign correspondant however are still absolute top tier journalism. Its a shame they dont apply those standards everywhere.
- throwawaythekey 2mo ago
  The ABC are sadly incredibly biased. A recent, prominent example is [1] where they edited footage to make it look like a soldier was shooting at an innocent civilian. They then appointed a 40 year abc/sbs veteran to investigate the incident who unsurprisingly found no wrong doing. All of this on a topic that isn't even super political... Granted they are still probably the best journalists in the country, but when you can't trust them to not alter primary evidence, or admit real fault when something has gone wrong, you cant really trust them for much. For day to day stuff I still find them an ok source, it just needs to be taken with a very heavy dose of salt. [1] https://7news.com.au/spotlight/7news-spotlight-abc-launches-investigation-over-extra-gunshots-in-video-of-ex-commando-heston-russells-november-platoon-c-16050778 https://7news.com.au/spotlight/7news-spotlight-abc-launches-...
  - protocolture 2mo ago
    Their biggest fault was giving back the filing cabinet. >where they edited footage to make it look like a soldier was shooting at an innocent civilian. In your link the ABC is claiming the footage wasnt edited by them. I mean its still a bit of weak journalism to publish it. Did that ever get resolved either way?
    - throwawaythekey 2mo ago
      > In your link the ABC is claiming the footage wasnt edited by them. I'll admit I don't fully understand what they were claiming/how it changed over time but they later issued an apology for the incident [1]. From what I can work out the thrust of the abc claim is "don't blame our journalists, the editors on multiple occasions accidentally did this for no reason at all and we then failed to catch it". Then midway through the apology they pivot to blaming twitter, or at least that is the flow of the guardian article. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/sep/17/abc-australion-troops-afghanistan-helicopter-footage-editing-ntwnfb https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/sep/17/abc-australion...

apparent 2mo ago

I used to listen to and read NPR. Since about 2015 they've been slipping, and at an increasing rate. After submitting several corrections, none of which were heeded, I have stopped taking them seriously. An outlet that does not correct clear-cut falsehoods is peddling a narrative, not reporting news.