NEWS about the NEWS Media, Favorite Investigative News Sources, and Their Best Stories

News Org Biases

This topic contains 11 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  PopeBeanie 5 months, 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
  • #27895


    The Epoch Times

    (I bought a subscription a couple months ago just to see how the enemy operates. Yes, this news org IS an enemy of the people!)

    I’ve seen Epoch Times ads on YouTube. Here’s a short article about them:

    The biggest spender on pro-Trump Facebook ads (besides his campaign) “straddles the line between an ultraconservative news outlet and a conspiracy warehouse”

    • This topic was modified 8 months, 4 weeks ago by  PopeBeanie. Reason: chg'd topic name from "Heavily Biased News Orgs"


    All news orgs these days are heavily slanted. I don’t think we could be any more divided!


    Sarah to join Faux News….



    She really is a good liar. It takes a certain finesse to smooth over Trump’s bullshit. She will be paid handsomely for her efforts. Girl power. Woot! Making money from scraping the scum off the ceiling and turning it into something palatable. Only a very smart person could make shit look that good.

    But like I said – Karma is a bitch

    and I’m pretty sure She broke the law too….


    • This reply was modified 10 months, 2 weeks ago by  Ivy.


    Then there is Fakebook…where so many still get their daily “news”.



    All news orgs these days are heavily slanted.

    Not really. I intend to suggest some that don’t twist and spin nearly as badly as Epoch Times, and I expect we will be able to suggest a few relatively trustworthy news orgs.

    Girl power. Woot!

    It took someone like Trump to hire someone like her. But back to the topic, in the case (for example) of this WaPo video, I know they’re biased too, but no where near as biased and unscrupulous as the orgs that helped propel him into office.



    Then there is Fakebook…where so many still get their daily “news”.

    I quit facebook (albeit because of “friends” spreading bad news and karma), mainstream news, and talk radio long ago. I’m about to post an article about how social media’s business model in general (but especially fb) helps make bad news go viral and then fester.

    I don’t think there’s any hope in hell to mitigate bad news and ugly biases, unless consumers start to care more about finding and sharing decent news sources. (I feel a bit guilty now about stoking this ugly news topic/fire because it doesn’t really help solve much.)



    As for Epoch Times, I forgot I was in a trial period until today when they bumped up the cost to about $20/month for one paper a week. They seem flush with money and their regular subscribers seem happy to pay.


    Moderator publishes a list of news orgs, with bias assessments. Here’s a chart for “2019” [I put in quotes because strangely, when downloaded, the filedate attribute is actually July 2018, which btw, probably explains why Epoch Times is not mentioned]:

    Allsides media bias chart, 2018 or 2019?


    Topic edit: I changed the name of this topic from “Heavily Biased News Orgs” to “News Org Biases”. As much as I want to diss the heavily biased orgs, I believe it’s much more useful to highlight orgs that are less biased.



    To give you an idea how biased the british newspapers can be take a look at these headlines after the Lux. PM got fed up and pissed off with Boris.

    Guardian: Boris HUMILIATED!

    BBC, Independent, Sky, FT, London Times: Boris is a no show

    Telegraph, Sun, Star: Boris AMBUSHED!


    There is absolutely nothing similar to this level of bias in American newspapers. Sure on television news there is, but even then the left leaning tv and online news channels are a LOT less biased than FOX and a whole lot less biased than say, the Guardian in the UK. It’s pretty hard to even call CNN that left wing. Compared with many other worldly publications and from a Canadian or European perspective, CNN seems totally centre wing.

    • This reply was modified 8 months, 4 weeks ago by  Davis.


    Guardian: Boris HUMILIATED! BBC, Independent, Sky, FT, London Times: Boris is a no show Telegraph, Sun, Star: Boris AMBUSHED!

    Are you sure that any real meat in the stories themselves is as biased as their headlines indicate? I’m inclined to believe that headlines in mainstream American papers are relatively less “sensational” to the dark point of hiding any bias.

    The whoops and jeers commonly expressed in Parliament also reflect the kind of showing off that audiences might just find attractively entertaining. Especially noticing the upper case with explanation points in your example headlines, I would likely chalk the headlines and stories up as titillating scandalous/entertainment type pieces, and not even read them. (Ditto for news or gossip about royal personalities.)

    I absolutely could be wrong and I don’t call myself an expert, but that Allsides chart [see above] looks more accurate to me than what you’re suggesting. Now even if/when we disagree on this topic, this is a valid and pertinent conversation.

    [Late edit: added ‘see above’ note]



    How Rupert Murdoch Is Influencing Australia’s Bushfire Debate – Critics see a concerted effort to shift blame, protect conservative leaders and divert attention from climate change.


    The idea that “greenies” or environmentalists would oppose measures to prevent fires from ravaging homes and lives is simply false. But the comment reflects a narrative that’s been promoted for months by conservative Australian media outlets, especially the influential newspapers and television stations owned by Rupert Murdoch.

    And it’s far from the only Murdoch-fueled claim making the rounds. His standard-bearing national newspaper, The Australian, has also repeatedly argued that this year’s fires are no worse than those of the past — not true, scientists say, noting that 12 million acres have burned so far, with 2019 alone scorching more of New South Wales than the previous 15 years combined.

    And on Wednesday, Mr. Murdoch’s News Corp, the largest media company in Australia, was found to be part of another wave of misinformation. An independent study found online bots and trolls exaggerating the role of arson in the fires, at the same time that an article in The Australian making similar assertions became the most popular offering on the newspaper’s website.

    It’s all part of what critics see as a relentless effort led by the powerful media outlet to do what it has also done in the United States and Britain — shift blame to the left, protect conservative leaders and divert attention from climate change.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.