No such thing. Get multiple biased sources that agree on the facts but not the interpretation and make up your own mind
- 1 month
I won’t deny that it’s gradually getting worse, but newspapers have ALWAYS had advertisements.
But even before that, you can’t tell me that there isn’t some bias in the story after Cletus heard from Abigail that Sarah overheard Jebidiah being rude to Old Man Hesseldorf.
- 1 month
I follow NYTimes to learn what the big money wants to talk about and ProPublica to learn what the big money doesn’t want to talk about. Between the two of them, I think I stay decently well informed. In theory, I could know all things if I read them enough.
No such thing as unbiased news. Even Associated Press and Reuters make decisions about what to report on. Those are two solid choices too, by the way. Pretty flat and even-handed.
- NormDeplume@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
Ground.news is my go-to source, and they have a very useful blind spot feature which specifically shows you stories you might not be aware of based on your political leanings
- 1 month
I always see the sponsorships
And was wondering if it’s any good
Mind if I ask what continent you are from?
I’m from europe and am wondering if it also pulls and analyzes european news appropriately
- NormDeplume@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
I’m from the US, but I believe they have a pretty good international representation, it’s really just a news aggregator
- 1 month
Closest I can think of is a news aggregation service like ground news…but as a user of theirs, there is still bias…it’s just “their bias”.
It presents you with how they rank different news outlets on political alignment and factuality…which itself is a problem…it’s how they rank it. You may rank it differently.
They also provide a summary and headline for all stories, which itself could be editorialized. And getting a push with an editorialized headline can easily prime your reaction to it.
Still, it’s the best I’ve seen, and I gladly renewed.
Fact is you will never truly get rid of bias. It will always exist. Best you can do is examine multiple sources with known biases in mind going into it.
1 monthAll news is biased. Every time someone writes something down, it has a perspective to it that provides a selective view of the truth. There’s no such thing as purely objective. The closest you can get is to aggregate multiple sources on any news worth your time. I find Ground News useful for this because it makes it convenient to look at multiple sources sorted by bias and then draw your own conclusion. Rather than trusting people not to make a straw-man out of opposing views it helps to hear what people actually think in their own words. You might even learn something, although I know no one really enjoys finding out their opponent actually has a point.
Kagi News is interesting in this reguard. All news has a bias. The general advice is to read multiple sources and filter out the bias and make your own conclusions.
Kagi News uses an LLM to scan lots of sources, and distills common stories for that day down to the straight facts for you. It also links to the sources it used and gives timelines for context. It doesn’t talor anything to individual users. Once a day it updates, and gives everyone the same news for that day.
Since it’s paid for by Kagi users, it has no adds. It’s a simple streamlined interface. I quite like it.
- 1 month
Thank you for that! I’m currently developing an app and need good RSS feeds, found it!
- Valentine Angell@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
According to https://app.adfontesmedia.com/chart/interactive there are a few that are nearly unbiased.
I use the chart to review sources as I come across them. It’s where I realized The Week is the lefty version of The Epoch Times.
- PlzGibHugs@piefed.caEnglish1 month
Its not the worst, but even this chart has some pretty significant issues. For example, both BBC and The Economist are said to have left-wing bias, which in and of itself is weird, but even weirder is that the BBC is said to be both more accurate and less left-wing than The Economist.
I use https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/
I also just follow independent reporters that have a bias I like, are honest about that bias, and cite their sources. (Nothing is ever truly unbiased)
Not that I’ve ever heard of/noticed, but if you have any details on that I’d love to hear.
- Grimdraken@lemmy.worldEnglish1 month
YMMV, but I found https://apnews.com/ pretty good. I haven’t really looked at news sites for a few years, so I apologise if this site actually sucks now.
- o0evillusion0o@sh.itjust.worksFrançais1 month
Jon Stewart, Jimmy Kimmel… Colbert used to be a good one but they assassinated the show.
- 1 month
You don’t.
All news has biases. You find sources that are pretty good, and get to know the motives; and just read critically.
Tons of sources that are compromised in one area or aspect have excellent reporting in another.
- 1 month
Reuters and AP (Associated Press) have long been well regarded as being generally neutral.
- 1 month
Others have mentioned Reuters and the AP. I’d also suggest the Financial Times and The Economist; they’re quite expensive but you get what you pay for. The BBC isn’t too bad actually - it’s obviously very British-focused and can be a bit wet, but they usually get the facts right and they do try hard to avoid favouring any given political viewpoint. Al Jazeera is also surprisingly good.
You can use media bias watchdog sites to find the closest balance you want. I like Reuters mostly because it’s just the facts and no editorialized filler. They quote the quotes and tell the events without telling the reader how they should feel about it
