• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Sure, but I don’t find it matters that much when you’re aware of the fact that people have biases as a reader. You can read news from any source and understand the slant of the publication. In fact, it can often be informative to read sources with known biases because the framing itself is informative. For example, you need to read the Wall Street Journal because it is the mouthpiece of the ruling class. It tells you exactly what capital is thinking, what they are afraid of, and how they are strategizing to protect their interests.

    • neo2478@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yes, but it is also important to financially support good journalism. That is what I am looking for in this post. That does not mean it is the only source of news one should read.

      • Free_Appalachia@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        If you are looking for stuff to financially support specifically, I think sites that handle leaks are probably your best bet. They always need money between all the legal shit and the infrastructure that requires.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Sure, but I’d argue good journalism doesn’t have much to do with having a bias. It’s perfectly possible for somebody to write good investigative journalism while having a particular bias. So, it’s not so much about the bias itself, but rather their ability to present the facts, to explain the relationships between the events, and to paint a broader context for the story.

        What I think your actual concern might be is regarding deceptive reporting where people try to paint things as something other than what they really are.

        • neo2478@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I think that’s a better way of explaining what I meant with unbiased. It was an oversimplification on my side.