What do you think is a reliable sources?

[boyando]

In a couple of recent threads, there has been a lot of call for a reliable source. Some think that if it comes from FOX, it is automatically a lie. And some think the opposite.

I will be the first to admit, that I question everything that comes from the big three news networks. I am not saying that I just believe every thing that comes from conservative source. No one is perfect. So I judge things that are said , by any source, against what I know from my life experiences.

So tell me what it takes to make your list of who you can trust for news and information.

[hordak]

There are 3 sides to every story.

"your side" , "my side" and the truth.

I trust those who have nothing to gain or lose.

[Traveler]

It is never a question of source but a question of bias. Any source of information that will not admit their bias is worse than unreliable – it is a deliberate lie.

The Traveler

[Just_A_Guy]

There's no such thing as a reliable source. All you can really do is take a left-slanted and right-slanted version of the same event, and try to read between the lines.

[Mahone]

Not sure if it's the kind of answer you are looking for, however this is wikipedias stance on what a reliable source is in order to be used on the wikipieda website: Wikipedia:Reliable sources - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I believe a similar answer would apply here.

[boyando]

Not sure if it's the kind of answer you are looking for, however this is wikipedias stance on what a reliable source is in order to be used on the wikipieda website: Wikipedia:Reliable sources - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I believe a similar answer would apply here.

Actually, I was looking for what "you" consider a reliable source. Were do you get your news and why do you trust it? Maybe even a little of the what stories have you personally seen and how were these stories treated by the press.

I am a firm believer that we all see what we want to see. Example; a few years back Karl Malone of the Utah Jazz basketball team, throw an elbow to the head of David Robinson of the San Antonio Spurs, knocking him out. The sports talk radio's show were a buzz here in Salt Lake with people calling in and saying that it was a regrettable situation but Karl didn't do anything that does not go on in any other game.

One of these talk show host played a live feed from one of San Antonio's sports station. Even though the video was the same, San Antonio fans could not understand why Karl was not arrested for assault. Both sides watched the same thing and came to opposite conclusions.

Let me know what "you" think. All of you.

Edited August 7, 2009 by boyando

[NeuroTypical]

Actually, I was looking for what "you" consider a reliable source. Were do you get your news and why do you trust it?

I've found it quite helpful to study statistics and logic. That knowledge, coupled with an understanding of the bias of the person delivering the news, helps me figure out what's really going on.

I like stratfor.com's commentary on geopolitics. Their bias: When they turn out to be right, they make more money. So, when they talk about what will happen with this administration or that world event, it's because they want to accurately forecast, not because they have a preferred result they want to see happen.

LM

[Mahone]

Hmmmm. I like to get information from websites that have a professional userbase and articles posted are subject to reader scrutiny. The professional internet community as a whole is generally quite quick to debunk myths/rumours/personal opinion. Slashdot - News for nerds, stuff that matters is a good example of this.

I'm generally quite skeptical. Anyone who works in IT will understand why . I take everything I read in the tabloids with a pinch of salt and will do my own research first before using the information.