seems to me there is a clear lack of definition as to what "main stream news" even means. It certainly is not the same as "mainstream media."
I am really only interested in truth tellers, journalists who verify facts. Opinion journalism has its place and I partake of some, but imho should be based on verifiable facts. Blaze and Epoch times hardly fits that definition. They incite and make a lot of false claims. Why anyone would want to give attention to unverifiable hyperbole is a mystery to me. Give me facts not some alternate hate speech devised to numb the masses.
If you want some whodunit, sci-fi or calamitous stories, rent a movie or watch tv. But entertainers claiming to deliver news? Just say no! I know it can be hard to not watch, like a train wreck, but paleeze, don't take it as news!
If you want real news, follow those that are based in facts or a close to as possible. Weed out the weasel words, non-sequiturs, ambiguity, fallacies, etc. If you can't identify someones premise and follow it to a logical conclusion, then dismiss for goodness sake. You don't have to buy into everything you hear or read!
I acknowledge it is getting more difficult to discern, but with a bit of research you can find those that come close to hitting the mark. Who owns the news source? Can you find a stated agenda of the "news" outlet? Do they provide their sources? Can their claims be substantiated via other sources?
Learn to discern....ok, off soapbox, back to work..... |
