I learn to use RSS and now use an app like feeder for android that gathers news from the places I want without an algorithm deciding for me.
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
54 points (95.0% liked)
Asklemmy
42520 readers
1293 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Sure but what are the places you want?
I like tech so mostly Ars Technical , Android authority , XDA Developers , Its FOSS , Torrentfreak.
I use Feeder too.
Feeder for Android and
QuiteRSS on my laptop/ Desktop (yes it's old and kinda ugly, but it has all the features I like is very solid).
Wish there was a cross syncing solution for read articles. I aint paying Β£9.99 a month for that.
AP, BBC and NPR
NPR is my go-to for soft spoken documentary pieces about uncomfortable topics.
Mostly the wire services (Reuters, AP).
NPR, AP, an Reuters are already mentioned. For leftist/left leaning sources I like Jacobin, truth out, it's going down, Jewish currents, current affairs, the intercept, democracy now, mintpress news (more Canadian centered), and left voice
Theres this tiktok account that reports using the ai voice of the newscaster fish from spongebob. Surprisingly intresting news from that.
Ah yes, @bikini.bottom.news!
I tend to follow journalists more than the publications themselves. That said my usual go-to's would be BBC World, CBC, Al-Jazeera, and AP.
I want to like Al Jazeera, but they are owned by the Qatar government so I am dubious of them.
Its good to be dubious. Its also good to include them to get a different bias into the mix. Only consuming media of the same bias will leave you ignorant without you knowing it, thats the believe I've come to adopt.
And you only realize which part of the bias is shared across a lot of media when you read media from outside the bubble. And a lot are within the bubble. To quote wikipedia:
progressively fewer individuals or organizations control increasing shares of the mass media.
There is enough reason to be dubious about all mass media. BBC is founded and owned by the UK government and many other publications by a billionaire family.
Previously I had thought media literacy was about chosing "reliable" sources but nowadays I believe its more about reading many of different biases and being dubious of all until their bias emerges.
IDK if that resonates with you at all or not. But I can also recommend Noam Chomskys "Manufacturing Consent", its a classic ofc.
Just a quick correction: the BBC is independent of the government and funded directly by the audience who it is, in theory, answerable to. The government would like to change that.
Thanks for the correction - This still needs clarification though. I'd argue that calling it "government funded" is the better mental model and "financed by the audience it is answerable to" is giving the false impression that the audience has any influence on what they are paying for and consuming - AFAIK they don't
The BBC is publicly funded, yes. The fee is however set by the government and accepted by the parliament, in which ususally the ruling coalition (or party) holds the majority, so its effectively set by the ruling party. This does make it technically different from direct state funding but de-facto the gov still has controll over the amount of funding the BBC will receive.
So while the audience pays directly it does not have the ability to pull or increase funding in approval or disapproval but the government does.
Like you said nominally the BBC is answerable to the audience, de-facto it is answerable to the government only.
Other publicly funded broadcasters have a different system, in Germany for example the federal states decide on the licence fee.
However de-facto this doesn't change anything. Its common knowledge in Germany that the publicly funded broadcasters are quite state affiliated, there have been a couple of court rulings confirming that.
So yeah for a bigger picture looking at funding only isn't sufficient
Very well said. This is precisely why I include sources like Al-Jazeera.
Yes, but you know what their biases are and can take that into account. Do you know what the biases are for the privately owned news sources? Sometimes sure, but it isn't always as clear.
The Onion. No need for further explanation.
Me too. I seriously go to The Onion for news. I started doing it as a joke, but then realized what people want to laugh about gave a much more honest picture of what people actually cared about on a daily basis. I live outside the USA so it's not otherwise obvious to me. It truly is America's Finest News Source.
The court jester is the only one allowed to tell the truth about the king, I guess.
The Economist
Not for breaking news perhaps, but for in-depth analysis and critical commentary the Economist is in a class of it's own. It's the only news magazine I subscribe to. They don't dumb down stories, they treat their readers as adults and they scrupulously avoid sensationalism. The standard of written English is exceptional, (something for which it is renowned). And I love the humor in some of the regular columns. The whole magazine is a joy to read from Letters to Obituaries. 10/10
It is also important because, while there is bias against Russia, the newspaper generally does a good job reporting on taking a step back from the issue to provide something more nuanced than typical news sources.
It also will write articles defending welfare spending if it finds a reason to do so, which it often finds.
NPR
PBS
BBC
Reuters
AP
(My state owned broadcaster RTΓ)
Other news sources are fine, but I prefer to double check these if I am uncertain.
Also Democracy Now! Is pretty good too.
off topic: do you watch the virgin media channels since you're irish
I would occasionally watch them if I'm flicking through channels etc, but they wouldn't be my go to source.
Which app do you use to follow that many source?
I use RSS readers. Specifically Feeder on Android and QuiteRSS on laptop/desktop
AOL news. Yes, it still exists.
But⦠why?
One day I just decided news didn't exist and stopped reading any of it. Last I checked it was 1992 and they invented moon pies. What a time to be alive.
Man.. used to be twitter and I donβt have a replacement yet. You could just follow all the journalists you wanted over there it was great. But now Iβm migrating away from the app.
I used Twitter too to check for the most up to date local news, but on the website the posts are not sorted chronologically anymore, so it is absolutely useless now
DW News, AP, Reuters, BBC (which I sometimes feel doesn't belong in this list).
Most often I'll see an article, and then google the topic to find a better place to read about it.
AP & Reuters are pretty good usually
CBC (Canadian public broadcaster) for Canadian stuff. They're pretty reliable and trustworthy while many other broadcasters are owned by an oligopoly of of telecom companies (which surprise, shy away from topics of competition and abuse by the parent companies). I also check out small small local independent places.
Also specific healthcare journals and organizations because I'm involved in that area.
Associated Press. Everyone else just takes their reports and puts their spin on it.
Thatβs only really true for run of the mill stories. News outlets do their own reporting all the time
Morning Brew. Their daily emails give me just the right amount of news. Most of the major stories in a concise format. I usually hate emails so I was skeptical when setting this up, but I do like it
Ground News. I see all of the same breaking news as anyone else who is tuned into a specific channel, but I can easily compare how the story is being spun.
Itβs also nice because I can link the story to anyone, no matter their affiliation, without implicitly endorsing one outletβs take on what to think about it.
BBC
Ground news.
I like Liberation News and Common Dreams
NYTimes
Semafor.com, more executive summaries than normal news articles, which I appreciate. They both use own reporting and other sources.
Also several topic or region specific summaries of the summaries as newsletters (also reachable via web).
No deep reads here, but 99% of the time I'm not interested enough in a topic for those anyway, and if I am, I follow their links to more expensive external reporting.
tl;dr news and ground news sometimes i find instresting topics on google discover also i mostly find about data breaches by mental outlaw + lemmy may have instresting news
AllSides
Wall Street Journal and NPR. Try to get the story from each side as well as I can.
Google News is my usual browse, then AP, Reuters, or axios. Radio npr. Tv msnbc but i get tired of the pundits.