Alternatives to Google & Yahoo News liberal bias

[renard_ruse]

Unfortunately over the past few years Google and Yahoo news crawler services have gradually become as biased as the majority of the print and television media have been for the past fifty years. This has increased lately, particularly in the case of Google (Yahoo always had a bit of an observable bias though its become worse). In the case of Google links to articles from openly liberal news sources, such as New York Times, Newsweek, Time, LA Times, Ass-ociated Press, Huffington Post, Politico, Slate, Christian Science Monitor (don't let the name fool you), and on and on and on, outnumbering those with other perspectives more and more. In recent weeks the only balance at all I see is the occasional link to a Wall Street Journal piece. What's more, op-ed pieces, almost always with a liberal or extreme liberal slant, are now more and more intermingled with the rest of the news.

This wasn't always the case. I hadn't even noticed the change much until the last year to six months, but apparently its been going on gradually since about 2006 (according to one source). It used to be internet news was a way to get news without going through the filter of the establishment print and television media. Now, the major internet news crawlers have the same bias as the more traditional establishment media.

I do not necessarily want a "conservative" or even far right news service, but I certainly will not tolerate one with a liberal bias anymore than I would subscribe to the New York Times home delivery or bird cage liner like Time magazine, and on and on and on ad naseum. At this point it looks like one of the best alternative is one with a conservative bias, the CNS News Service, which is unfortunate. I don't want any bias, I want professional journalism that presents the facts as neutrally as possible and from many different sources to minimize systematic bias as much as possible. However, for now I will look to alternatives like CNS until we have that.

So, here's there site, at least a temporary alternative to the outrage that Google News has unfortunately become:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/categories

 

[renard_ruse]

Does anyone else have any suggestions for alternative non-liberal-biased news crawlers?

 

[phrodeau]

News crawlers display what people on the internet are reading and linking to. So maybe it's the internet users who are biased.

You might try AOL news. Mostly older folks use AOL.

 

[off2bed]

Beritbart?

 

[overthebow]

Does anyone else have any suggestions for alternative non-liberal-biased news crawlers?

You are a moron.

 

[KingOrfeo]

In the case of Google links to articles from openly liberal news sources, such as New York Times, Newsweek, Time, LA Times, Ass-ociated Press . . .

You really are an idiot, aren't you?

 

[Powertone]

You are a moron.

anyone who has a sig pic of Obama telling everyone to chill the fuck out is a moron's moron ~

 

[overthebow]

anyone who has a sig pic of Obama telling everyone to chill the fuck out is a moron's moron ~

Fail.

Monty Python already did that "father's father's father" thing.

And that one was funny.

 

[Cade Is Here]

I have noticed that Yahoo answers usually deletes any question that is negative towards obama. I have seen that there are many complaints on it being one sided especially during the election just like some forums.

 

[overthebow]

I have noticed that Yahoo answers usually deletes any question that is negative towards obama. I have seen that there are many complaints on it being one sided especially during the election just like some forums.

Was the answer factual? To say that it was negative toward President Obama is not enough information.

Or, you are really screwed up and see things as only being pro or anti Obama.

 

[Cade Is Here]

Was the answer factual? To say that it was negative toward President Obama is not enough information.

Or, you are really screwed up and see things as only being pro or anti Obama.

Many have complained that while during the elections that anything they brought out about obama that was indeed factual but was negative towards him was deleted.

While anything against mccain was never deleted.

 

[jeninflorida]

You are a moron.

are you saying that most news organizations are not liberal in their views?

 

[Powertone]

Fail.

not ...

 

[KingOrfeo]

are you saying that most news organizations are not liberal in their views?

CNN -- or even MSNBC -- is no LW analogue to Fox News, i.e., is not liberal in the sense that Fox News is conservative. The Washington Post is not liberal in the sense that the Washington Times is conservative. It's that way throughout the media. The right has mass-media outlets, the left has The Nation and Mother Jones and Democracy Now! radio. Asserting otherwise can be, and often has been, the thin end of the wedge of some pretty deep dishonesty and goalpost-shifting, e.g., defining the "center" as a point midway between Fox News and CNN, or, even, as a point much closer to Fox on that line, or, even, as just where Fox is; no, Ma'am, the center is right about where CNN is.

 

[rosco rathbone]

When I pay attention, Yahoo News seems to have roughly the same political slant as "Politico". Corporate-Republican, IOW.

 

[KRCummings]

I get the feeling that some people don't understand what the AP is.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I get the feeling that some people don't understand what the AP is.

And where does this "liberal-AP" meme come from, anyway? I see a long list of AP-related controversies here, but none has anything to do with LW or RW bias.

 

[KRCummings]

And where does this "liberal-AP" meme come from, anyway? I see a long list of AP-related controversies here, but none has anything to do with LW or RW bias.

That's because you're talking about a couple thousand different news outlets. Some will be liberal, some will be conservative. The AP is just a co-op and can't really have political leanings. There might be a majority that lean one way or the other but that would hardly qualify it as a whole.

 

[KingOrfeo]

The AP is just a co-op and can't really have political leanings.

Co-ops are Commie!

 

[JoeRockStar]

I read Fox and CNN online every day, then try to weed out the bias and form my own opinion somewhere between the two.

 

[KRCummings]

Co-ops are Commie!

Yes, I'm sure they are according to Miles and Vette and that whole group but they're idiots.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I do not necessarily want a "conservative" or even far right news service, but I certainly will not tolerate one with a liberal bias anymore than I would subscribe to the New York Times home delivery or bird cage liner like Time magazine, and on and on and on ad naseum. At this point it looks like one of the best alternative is one with a conservative bias, the CNS News Service, which is unfortunate. I don't want any bias, I want professional journalism that presents the facts as neutrally as possible and from many different sources to minimize systematic bias as much as possible. However, for now I will look to alternatives like CNS until we have that.

You do understand, don't you, that CNS is biased in a sense -- not merely in a direction, but in a sense -- that the New York Times is not? I mean, it's a Media Research Center project and it was founded by Brent Bozell, for "Bob"'s sake! And it's funded by ExxonMobil!

A July 15, 2005, CNS article claimed that Democratic strategist Paul Begala said that Republicans wanted to kill him and his family. [6]. (The article is no longer available on the CNS website, but it is summarized by SourceWatch[7], and quoted in full on another website[8].) Begala vehemently denied this, claiming that when he said, "They want to kill me and my children if they can," he was referring to terrorists, not Republicans. [9] CNS refused to retract the claim, insisting that "[t]here was nothing unclear about what Begala said."[10][11] Then-CNS editor in chief David Thibault challenged Begala for his "unmistakable and outrageous coupling of terrorists and Republicans."[12][13]

A January 13, 2006, CNS article assailed the military record of Democratic Rep. John Murtha, a former Marine who has heavily criticized the Iraq war. The article quoted people who were either former political opponents of Murtha or who were dead or incapacitated casting aspersions on the two Purple Hearts Murtha earned while serving in the Vietnam War.[14] The next day, the Washington Post repeated the article's allegations.[15] Critics likened the CNS article to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacks on the war record of Democrat John Kerry during the 2004 presidential campaign as another example of conservatives attempting to discredit the military credentials of Democrats in order to blunt their criticism of the Iraq war.[16]

If you really want "professional journalism that presents the facts as neutrally as possible," then NYT and Time are at any rate a far, far better choice for you than CNS.

If you really want "professional journalism that presents the facts as neutrally as possible," that is.

 

[mercury14]

Unfortunately over the past few years Google and Yahoo news crawler services have gradually become as biased as the majority of the print and television media have been for the past fifty years. This has increased lately, particularly in the case of Google (Yahoo always had a bit of an observable bias though its become worse). In the case of Google links to articles from openly liberal news sources, such as New York Times, Newsweek, Time, LA Times, Ass-ociated Press, Huffington Post, Politico, Slate, Christian Science Monitor (don't let the name fool you), and on and on and on, outnumbering those with other perspectives more and more. In recent weeks the only balance at all I see is the occasional link to a Wall Street Journal piece. What's more, op-ed pieces, almost always with a liberal or extreme liberal slant, are now more and more intermingled with the rest of the news.

This wasn't always the case. I hadn't even noticed the change much until the last year to six months, but apparently its been going on gradually since about 2006 (according to one source). It used to be internet news was a way to get news without going through the filter of the establishment print and television media. Now, the major internet news crawlers have the same bias as the more traditional establishment media.

I do not necessarily want a "conservative" or even far right news service, but I certainly will not tolerate one with a liberal bias anymore than I would subscribe to the New York Times home delivery or bird cage liner like Time magazine, and on and on and on ad naseum. At this point it looks like one of the best alternative is one with a conservative bias, the CNS News Service, which is unfortunate. I don't want any bias, I want professional journalism that presents the facts as neutrally as possible and from many different sources to minimize systematic bias as much as possible. However, for now I will look to alternatives like CNS until we have that.

So, here's there site, at least a temporary alternative to the outrage that Google News has unfortunately become:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/categories

Yahoo is mostly AP and Reuters articles. That's as close to neutral as you're going to find these days.

Therefore there is no problem.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Yahoo is mostly AP and Reuters articles. That's as close to neutral as you're going to find these days.

Therefore there is no problem.

The mainstream, like the facts, would appear to have a liberal bias.

 

[renard_ruse]

You really are an idiot, aren't you?

No. You are.

The top issue for anti-liberals today NEEDS to be efforts to get this liberal bias rooted out of these on line "news" sources before it is too late and its just like the print media was for fifty years.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH OF MEDIA BIAS.