[OT] Where to get a balanced and varied source of news in the UK?

[Tim Watts]

I'm getting right pissed off with the media (and have been for some time). It's mostly biased sensationalist tripe where the headline is a far far offbeat interpretation of even the words contained within story below, let alone other versions of the same story.

If I wanted to read patronising biased s**te, I'd buy the Sun.

Just in the process of dumping my subscription to The Times as Murdoch has reduced even that to sensationalism.

The Indy seems not my better, which was a disappointment.

I'm suspecting a news aggregator of stories from a wider variety of sources, including non UK, but in English, is the way to go.

But I'm not sure where to start - any suggestions?

[S Viemeister]

The Financial Times is surprisingly good. If you tweak for your particular preferences on Google news, that can also be useful.

[Huge]

I'm not sure there are any.

[Mark Allread]

Reuters

[Tim Watts]

?

OK - thank you! I'll give that a try. I never thought they might have an "end user" website (I thought they only sold news to end user media organisations).

[Vir Campestris]

Read the Torygraph _and_ the Grauniad.

Andy

[Huge]

Yeah, but the Grauniad makes me nauseous.

[Huge]

On reflection, so does the Telegraph these days.

[Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp]

In the UK is a little difficult.

Of the UK is easier, I use the Irish Times

AB

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Good luck. If you find one, let me know.

There was a time when the better papers reported the news. Comment on it could be ignored or not. They all seem to combine the two now.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Vir Campestris escribió:

I used to do just that (and the BBC), but have you /seen/ the TG recently? It's like a very, very bad version of Mail Online. All z- list celeb crap, listicles and clickbait.

Like the OP, I've been looking for a good source of news.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Huge escribió:

It's awful. I've stopped looking.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Mark Allread escribió:

That looks worth a try. Thanks for the tip!

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Tim Watts escribió:

I read a mix of sites daily to try and get a balanced view. Forgot earlier to mention

be warned this is funded by the Kremlin, so it might just ever so slightly have a smidgen of an inkling of a suggestion of a hint of bias.

[tabbypurr]

Used to read Reuters over a valve shortwave radio. Life is so much easier now.

NT

[Tim Watts]

I hate the clickbait.

And the semi customised adverts like "Laser eye surgery takes by storm" No it ****ing doesn't.

[Tim Watts]

Indeed - I do read that, with the mindset that it will be a contrary viewpoint.

[Brian Gaff]

As has been observed, it seems that the democratising of news via biased facebook and other media has in fact sounded the death knell to independent reporting. Everyone has a smart phone and the lazy folk in the media use the footage no matter how one sided that may be. Sadly since nobody wants to pay for news any more then nobody will employ a reporter to go out and be shot at to collect it. Brian

[harry]

[The Natural Philosopher]

Its the same with all newspapers. They are not news. They are carefully tailored opinions matched to the bigotry of a particular target market that they nurture and intensify, whilst selling crap product to them.

Once you realise that it is occasionally possible to distil one percent of actual fact from them.

E.g. I do believe there has been an earthquake in New Zealand, and people have died. That all I know. The rest of the column inches are garbage.

Once you realise that newspapers are there to sell advertisers product to a given market sector by pandering to their bigotry, the nature of their content becomes clear.

This is just as true of e.g. BBC and sky news.

Except the BBC is selling something slightly diffferent - a political perspective.