Do you Google search and click on whatever news sources come up or do you look into the news sources leanings, news reporting quality, and credibility? Maybe just if you can vibe with it or not in general?

Simplified

Do you save a list of specific news sites? Or do you just click on anything just to read that specific story on a search engine?

Me personally: I have a set list of sites I check. I know that they are credible and trust worthy to the public, being non profits and them having high standards to news reporting. (some of them include Npr, and Ap news) Most of their news stories are intended to benefit the public. Of course they aren’t always perfect, but a solid choice, especially if you’re starting out on picking a specific news source.

How about you all?

    • nnullzz@lemmy.world
      0·
      2 months ago

      Seconded. Been using it since early summer and it’s been great having instant access to bias and credibility data. Its also been nice to be able to easily read other perspectives on the same topic.

    • oxjox@lemmy.mlEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      While I do have Ground News installed on my iPad, I only use it as a widget to let me know what’s going on. The sources it uses are generally not that great. Either the site is severely biased or the site is riddled with ads and pop ups. Basically every time I go to read an article it’s full of shit. I’ll give it credit as a substantial aggregator but it’s still pulling from sources that use click bait headlines. It’s not any better than social media.

    • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
      0·
      2 months ago

      My issue with ground news is it doesn’t give any weight to funding sources when making its’ bias ratings, which makes it easy for billionaire-funded media conglomerates with a “neutral and unbiased” front to fly under the radar.

  • justhach@lemmy.world
    0·
    2 months ago

    You can reliably quickly tell if a news source is credible depending on how many appeals to emotion and superfluous adjectives/descriptors are found in their articles.

    A lot of it is about parsing multiple sources, and extrapolating the data from the spin.

  • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
    0·
    2 months ago

    IMO you’re doing it the right way.

    If there’s a single indicator to pay attention to, it’s the source of funding. Where does the media outlet get its money from?

    Next is professional ethics: does it employ real journalists? Journalism is like medicine, it’s a profession with a code of conduct. In this case, a commitment to factual accuracy, a good-faith search for the truth, fairness in choices about what to cover, transparency about sources, etc.

    And if you feel the journalists are doing a bad job, then go back to point 1 and ask: Who is paying them? Are you? The reason for today’s crisis in journalism is not that journalists are lazy or evil, it’s that the internet cratered their business model. More of us need to step up and pay. It’s that simple.

    I have a couple of paid subscriptions. If that’s the cost of living in a properly informed society, it’s a great deal.

    • Rob200@lemmy.autism.placeOPEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      Not a bad source actually since, you’re atleast getting mostly stories posted/shared by regular individuals and not a search engine algorithm throwing the same few sites all the time at you.

      I use Lemmy as one of my secondary primary sources for news, while not my major, which happens to be a small handful of nonprofit ones. For tech news particularly, Lemmy users tend to do pretty good at sharing some good stories.

  • jeffw@lemmy.world
    0·
    2 months ago

    At times, I find “unbiased” sources painful in how they pull their punches. It can be refreshing to me to find sources that are willing to write to their audience.

    FWIW, non-profit does not mean unbiased. Nor are they necessarily more accurate.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    0·
    2 months ago

    as far as a collection of news, I get a lot of it from 1440, which compiles current, objective news stories reliably.

    I get ideas from the posts here, but I’m pretty careful about checking multiple sources before accepting any of the articles people post here as legitimate information.

    • Rob200@lemmy.autism.placeOPEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      I heard of services like this that do this or similar I haven’t;t actually checked one out long enough to see how well it works myself.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        2 months ago

        a lot of aggregators just throw shit together, but 1440 works pretty hard on making sure their articles are simply reporting significant news from reliable sources.

  • Lemvi@lemmy.sdf.org
    0·
    2 months ago

    I like to look at who owns a news source and which country it is operating in to get an idea how reliable it might be.

    It is also worth looking at the rethoric: do the headlines seem clickbaity? Do the articles cover more than one side to a story?

    I also look at the kinds of stories a news source covers, and whether it seems like they push some sort of agenda from the things they choose to report on.

    But yeah, I have come to find a bunch of sources I trust, and that I go to for news.

  • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
    0·
    2 months ago

    If I don’t see it on Lemmy, my parents usually let me know.

    No don’t worry they are progressives so it’s almost always NPR or local.