Objective Unbiased News source

[TheDeeEm]

Can yanyoneou guys suggest a objective unbiased weekly news source? Preferably a podcast that focuses on the US, with some world news.

No fluff pieces. No opinion pieces. No garbage politics.

Just the facts.

[daniel1948]

No sources are unbiased. However, to round out your usual sources and get a broader view of the news, I'd recommend reading some foreign news sources. If you read any languages other than English, look for news from the countries whose language(s) you read. It's also often recommended that you read sources whose biases you disagree with, to avoid being in a news echo chamber.

Full disclosure: Though I give the above advice, I am avoiding the news as much as I can. It makes me angry, gives me ulcers, and raises my blood pressure. My health is more important to me than keeping up on the latest outrages of the pustule that an anti-democratic electoral system put into the highest office in the land.

[TheDeeEm]

Sure, I realize that NO source is unbiased, but some are more so than others. I am with you in that I try to keep my "news" consumption to a minimum. I would however like to at least get a weekly look at what is happening.

Surely there is a "just the facts" podcast. Not interested in reading news. I'll spend my time reading things I enjoy.

[daniel1948]

Everything I said about reading applies to podcasting. There are no unbiased sources. Look for foreign sources to broaden your scope.

[Ah.hell]

Sure, I realize that NO source is unbiased, but some are more so than others. I am with you in that I try to keep my "news" consumption to a minimum. I would however like to at least get a weekly look at what is happening.

Surely there is a "just the facts" podcast. Not interested in reading news. I'll spend my time reading things I enjoy.

  Even a "just the facts" source will have bias, the bias will be in what facts they report if nothing else.

No sources are unbiased. However, to round out your usual sources and get a broader view of the news, I'd recommend reading some foreign news sources. If you read any languages other than English, look for news from the countries whose language(s) you read. It's also often recommended that you read sources whose biases you disagree with, to avoid being in a news echo chamber.

Full disclosure: Though I give the above advice, I am avoiding the news as much as I can. It makes me angry, gives me ulcers, and raises my blood pressure. My health is more important to me than keeping up on the latest outrages of the pustule that an anti-democratic electoral system put into the highest office in the land.

Funny, this post describes my attitude nearly perfectly.

[Billzbub]

Okay you all, let's say it is a given that no news source is totally unbiased.  Which ones come closest to what the OP is asking for?  Which ones do you all read or listen to?

Right now I read CNN.  It has too many opinion pieces and WAY to much video (my work internet and PC do not like video), so I'm interested in this thread as well.

[CarbShark]

Claims of mainstream media bias are largely unfounded.

Professional journalist work just as hard as scientists and economics and pollsters to eliminate bias from their work. (This does not apply to advocacy journalism or commentary and opinions)

Most of the major newspapers provide a fairly unbiased news report. As do most of the major networks national news shows.

They also make an effort to include a variety of  diverse voices, perspectives and opinions in their commentary, opinions an editorials.

Stray away from them and you’ll find more biased reporting, not less.

That said the most even handed TV news sources in the US are the PBS News hour and BBC World news


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheDeeEm]

So.... No one wants to answer my ACTUAL question. They just want to tell me how my question is wrong. Typical skeptic attitude. This is why I am not a activist.

OH MY I JUST MADE A "SWEEPING GENERALIZATION"

Thank you for advocating for me Billzbub.

It's not just you guys. I have been really irritated lately by people's tendency to answer questions on forums by NOT ACTUALLY ANSWERING THEM AT ALL.

Surely some reasonable person here understands the SPIRIT of my question and will give me the ACTUAL NAME of a new source that they believe to be the most unbiased possible by the human brain. I will sort out the parts that I think may not be.

[Soldier of FORTRAN]

my ACTUAL question

Literally the only thing you can do is know what the biases are.

Every source will lie about certain things.  Every so often something'll come up where everyone's lying. 

NPR's usually pretty good.  Keep in mind they're center-right pro-corporate.
Al-Jazeera's usually pretty good.  Keep in mind they're Qatari funded.
The Economist's usually pretty good.  Keep in mind they're center-right and broadly neoliberal.
Vox is usually pretty good.  Keep in mind they're 'affluent urban liberal' as hell.

For environmental stuff, lately, I've been coming across articles from Yale's Environment 360 web magazine more and more.  They've all been great. 

edit:

A few years back, I had a Financial Times subscription.  That was the most useful, clear reporting I've ever seen.  Note: The WSJ isn't very good anymore.

[Tatyana]

I really like BBC Analysis and More or Less: Behind the Statistics podcast, and a few from The Economist. Unfortunately, they are not really a broad source of news, but more focused on a few key stories or issues, and of course, UK and EU leaning.


I like to search under podcast providers, and I have found the BBC quite good for being quite balanced. I also like the Guardian, but they are a bit left of the spectrum in the UK, so obviously they are communists in the US.

[TheDeeEm]

so obviously they are communists in the US.

HAHAHA  ^This^

[Beef Wellington]

Full disclosure: Though I give the above advice, I am avoiding the news as much as I can. It makes me angry, gives me ulcers, and raises my blood pressure. My health is more important to me than keeping up on the latest outrages of the pustule that an anti-democratic electoral system put into the highest office in the land.

Stress can't cause an ulcer, unless you take too many painkillers to vanquish a news-related headache. I bet stress could make an existing ulcer feel worse though.

[CarbShark]

So.... No one wants to answer my ACTUAL question. They just want to tell me how my question is wrong. Typical skeptic attitude. This is why I am not a activist.

Most of the major newspapers provide a fairly unbiased news report. As do most of the major networks national news shows.

This was a direct answer to your actual question.

 
 

[daniel1948]

So.... No one wants to answer my ACTUAL question.

I thought I did: Look for foreign news sources, preferably in a foreign language if you speak one.

But I cannot name a specific source because I really don't think any if them are unbiased. As noted above by someone else, the best ones still choose what events to report.

But bias is really not the only problem in the media. Often they just get it wrong because they don't understand it or screw up the details. We see all the time on the SGU how a science story gets completely twisted by journalists who just don't understand the material. I was occasionally in the news when I was active in the peace movement, and the newspaper often got minor, unimportant details wrong. The news is unreliable in many more ways than just bias.

[Soldier of FORTRAN]

I cannot name a specific source because I really don't think any if them are unbiased. [...] The news is unreliable in many more ways than just bias.

That's my issue, too. What OP's asking for doesn't exist.  And if you pick one to treat this way, you're setting yourself up to absorb their biases and defects.

edit: One of my 'lottery winner daydreams' is setting up a maximally neutral news outfit.  Explicitly outline a mile-high, macro-scale perspective then just do that.