Is there a news source that isn't biased?

No.

No. All news sources are biased in some way. All journalists are biased to some level. The way to get around this is to engage with a range of sources and not just mainstream sources. I like the BBC, the New York Times, The Guardian, The Sydney Morning Herald, the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Authority – our public broadcaster). However, I also read alternative news sources produced in Australia and overseas. Read widely. That’s really the only thing you can do.

I really believed it so not long ago….but they have all revealed their stripes and spots that tell me I am on my own. All of media is now desperately hell bent on internet clicks to survive…they are the new brothels of what we want to (or they want you to) mentally believe we need, want, or feel we need to get through the day or vote for the plastic politician they shove in front of our face. An explicative would feel good right now but so would a bubble bath….I choose the latter because I thankfully can…

I get my news from many sources. Some items don’t jive with all sources, some do. When all items point the same way I can assume they are true.

I don’t believe so. Bias is difficult to avoid, we are deeply biased creatures. I read many sources from many angles in hopes of keeping my perspective balanced. I have recommended it repeatedly on here lately, but allsides.com is a convenient resource for doing so.

No.

I try the many sources route. But I don’t know who to really believe. I’d prefer to have at least a “most trusted source.”

For me, that seems like NPR, but it leans left, either by wrong doing by the right, or it’s too liberal….

How am I supposed to stay “informed,” when I can’t trust the information?......

There are many news sources that aim to be impartial and put a lot of effort into ensuring their output is well researched, fair and isn’t influenced by political or commercial interests. The BBC is one such source, I’m not so familiar with NPR. Other sources have a viewpoint and their coverage is slanted. That doesn’t mean they are no good. Many such sources put a lot of research into their stories and can provide useful information and insight into what is going on in the world. The Guardian newspaper for one reports the news from a left wing perspective. For a right wing viewpoint, at least in the UK, there is the Telegraph and again it carries out original investigations and reporting which would be of interest to everyone and not just those on the right.

Social media is not a good source if you want to keep informed and there are numerous news outlets that don’t do much research themselves but simply put a political spin on existing stories or even make stories up that are not true. These stories are often ‘fake news’ but this term shouldn’t include genuine stories from reputable sources just because you don’t like what they say.

Not a chance, their eagerness to bow to influential shareholders guarantees bias

There’s a magazine called “The Week” that you might want to subscribe to. It is a weekly digest of national and world news and the articles present quotes from both right and left sources so you get a feel for what is being reported. I enjoy it.

Personally, I think the New York Times and the The Wall Street Journal try to be accurate in their reporting and vet their stories; the Times has a generally liberal slant but some Conservative Op_Ed columnists. WSJ skews more Conservative. I also like NPR. While there is some bias on all these three sources, I believe they genuinely strive to avoid reporting fake news.

All news is written by people, which means you’re going to get their slant, but it’s definitely not true that all news is equally bad because of this. Some news sources try much harder than others to avoid sensationalism. I trust NPR, the New York Times, and BBC the most on this front.

This has been circulating a lot lately and I believe there’s some truth to it.

Reuters is one of the least biased. But not so good on US-based news.

All news sources are biased because there are humans writing the articles.

@Mariah your link is a dead link

Most news outlets are going to have a particular slant, bias is hard to avoid completely. But that, in itself, is OK as long as they are at least honest with the facts of the issue.

Example – two news outlets report on the destruction of the Death Star. One reports that terrorists have destroyed a vital Imperial resource damping the Empire’s ability to maintain law and order, and resulting in massive loss of Imperial officers, troops and billions of credits. Another news source reports that brave freedom fighters have scored a major victory against an oppressive, totalitarian regime and it’s terrifying war machine.

Both sources agree with the basic facts: the Death Star was vital to the Empire. Its destruction did lead to a huge loss of life for the Empire’s military. And the damages were in the billions (trillions?) of credits. Those are facts. But whether the Empire is a necessary force for galactic stability, law and order or an evil, totalitarian regime, whether the Rebel Alliance are terrorists or freedom fighters – those things are a matter of point of view.

As long as the facts are honest ( no “alternative facts”) and discernable from the opinion then there should be no issue and the reader/viewer should be able to glean the information he needs to come to his own point of view.

The problem is, with much of our “news” today the opinion is presented as the news and the facts, if presented at all, are thin.

Whoops – too late for me to edit too – take the v off the end.

The mainstream media in the US has a severe pro-corporate bias. After Clinton deregulated them in the 90’s they have merged until nearly all media in the US is owned by 6 mega corporate conglomerates. PBS has to be careful not to rock the boat because they depend on federal funding for their existence.

I think the best you can do is watch news that is very transparent about their biases. I like The Young Turks. They have an obvious progressive perspective, but they are 100% honest about it and do a phenominal job at making these biases clear—pointing out when they’re stating personal, biased opinions and when they’re reporting objective facts.

@gorillapaws I suspect PBS won’t be depending on Federal funding for long.

I expect them all to be biased. I look at their funding sources and try to factor that in.

I prefer to get my information from sources that are in different countries. I feel that it gives me a clearer overall view of things.

I’ve found this useful http://www.allsides.com and will sometimes do a compare/contrast there. I admit I can’t deal with Breitbart and won’t look at anything from there. They hung onto Milo Y for too long.

@Mariah ‘s link without the v :) graphic

@BellaB I like AllSides too.

We need to stop and examine this bias business and particularly when charges of biased reporting are leveled against organizations previously regarded as reliable sources for the objective dispersal of the news. There is a disturbing movement afoot well suited to an age of non thinking individuals. Simply put, this trend is around defining bias as “any explanation of reality that varies from my own.” If you would prefer to doubt that this is indeed the case, we need only glance at the current President to see the principle personified and chugging successfully along full steam. With the rise of what passes for conservatism these days, no one should be surprised at the utilization of so convenient a device as conflating the truth with bias. When our friends on the right bemoan the epidemic of liberal bias afflicting the mainstream media, it might be a good idea to step back and ask, “how is it that formerly reliable new sources like the BBC, New York Times, Wall St. Journal—- you know the list- how is it that all of these institutions fall into the liberal camp?” Have they always been loaded up with marxists and nobody noticed? Is it a coincidence that the rise of right wing nut job conservatism occurs coincidental to the “outing” of the media.

It might be a handy idea to keep in mind that beating up on journalism and its practitioners is necessary when the goal is to move the truth itself to the right.

I tend to look at external news sources. Want a clearer picture of what’s going on in America? Read UK and Canadian news sources.

I also enjoy following senators and members of Parliament from other countries on Twitter. They’re often quite candid.

I was surprised to find the Christian Science Monitor to be rather unbiased. You can see it in @Mariah ‘s graphic near the center.

PBS News Hour

@LostInParadise

Yeah, the CSM has pretty much always tried to be as objective as possible (a mandate of the paper’s founder). Which is probably why it’s always struggled financially.

CSM has been a regular check-in for me for about 15 years now. I originally fell into by way of
https://www.aldaily.com , which is not a news site but does cover politics/news. I’ve had aldaily as my home page for years – partly because of the all the media links on the left-hand side.