People say Fox News leans more right, and CNN leans more left. 

I've been very wary of news for a while now so I was wondering if there are other media outlets out there that are not as biased either way.  There is talk that radio news coverage is more trustworthy and that social media is the outright worst.

What news outlets do you trust to get the most accurate news coverage?

none

Probably only CSPAN.
Everybody else is biased one way or the other.
I use a mix of sources and get a balanced view.
I visit Russian, Chinese, Indian, British, Israeli, Arab sites
et al.
I generally treat them like Wikipedia, stay away from anything
political.
I stream talk shows Rush, Hannity, Levin and Elder.
I comment on the Hill which is very Left, but fairly allows
most comments. I did just get off a one week time-out though.
Be careful on LGBTQWERTYUIOP comments there.
I have been banned from commenting on several sites that are
"conservative" but I still read them, it is interesting that the most
intolerant sites are conservative!
If you want to know what the Democrat party is doing Politico
is good for a laugh.

Full disclosure I'm completely on Satellite as I cannot
get anything local. I barely have cell service.
There is no cable, I can't even get a DSL line
from the phone company.
My access to the world is limited by bandwidth,
data allowances,  and weather.  Heavy rains kill the
TV and internet.
Aloha.

Pretty much everything is biased one way or the other.  On purpose or unintentional.  Opinion pieces, cropping videos, ignoring topics, wording of questions, etc.
Has to be this way or else it would be long and boring.  People will naturally gravitate to the media they can relate with and feel good.  The problem is with media that claims to be unbiased but are not.

Like Grovler said, Cspan is a good example of true unbiased media.

American corporate news is pretty much the worst at the moment, matching or surpassing Soviet levels of censorship and propaganda. Look for more international sources that are not tied to giant corporations. You have to look hard, though, and use different search engines because they always mess with the results.

If you do not have time to hunt around try Newsvoice. You can tailor it to fit your agenda, or use more expansive settings if your goal is to widen your perspective.

FOX openly labels their segments as "News" or "Opinion".

CNN labels everything they do as "News".  MSNBC is pretty much the same.

At least with FOX, you can pay closer attention to the news, and take the opinion shows with a grain of salt.

FOX also invites people with different opinions to come onto their shows to discuss and provide arguments supporting their positions.

CNN only invites people they disagree with in order to try and belittle or demean them.  The hosts talk over the guests without giving them a chance to fully answer anything.  Real journalists are not supposed to argue with their guests to win a debate, but that's what they do.

Tucker lets his guests state their positions until they devolve into a bunch of talking point nonsense.  Then he shreds them with the facts.  He gave them the chance to make their case, but they blew it.

Thanks to everyone who shared information, I really appreciate it.  I dunno if I am just an idiot (very possible) but it was mentioned in the above video that people tend to gravitate to news media that shares their views and beliefs.  I don't.  I just want the story.

I have a hard time understanding why this can't be so.  Is it because sensationalism sells?  Is it because advertisers dictate what stories and spin to apply to the news?.

What I could really relate to was when the guy on the left in the video mentioned that if the news were unbiased then theoretically everyone would draw the same conclusion.

The news, especially lately, has me wondering how accurate the reporting is.  I'm trying to learn how some of you guys deal with this.

Thanks for all the help!!

Thanks to everyone who shared information, I really appreciate it.  I dunno if I am just an idiot (very possible) but it was mentioned in the above video that people tend to gravitate to news media that shares their views and beliefs.  I don't.  I just want the story.

I have a hard time understanding why this can't be so.  Is it because sensationalism sells?  Is it because advertisers dictate what stories and spin to apply to the news?.

What I could really relate to was when the guy on the left in the video mentioned that if the news were unbiased then theoretically everyone would draw the same conclusion.

The news, especially lately, has me wondering how accurate the reporting is.  I'm trying to learn how some of you guys deal with this.

Thanks for all the help!!

Not everyone "deals with it."  They simply accept whatever "news" confirms their biases and opinions, and ignore those that don't.

Real independent thinkers listen to many sources that they trust, and try to get the unvarnished facts.  That includes tuning out the blatantly biased sources that routinely skew the facts to further an agenda.

You know an anti-gun, anti-Trump and anti-White source when you see them pushing the same opinions story after story.

Don't tell me what to think.  Tell me what both sides have to say about the issue/event/story, and let ME decide what I think.

There's an age old newspaper slogan: "If it bleeds, it leads."

News organizations depend on emotional responses of readers & viewers to capture and keep their attention.

It's a marketing "tool" that many industries use, such as car dealers and real estate brokers.  Doing a pure factor-by-factor comparison would mean everyone must price their products at the bare minimum in order to compete.  But if they can reach buyers on an emotional level, the buyers will sacrifice price for perceived intangible qualities, like appearance, location, social standing, or environmental "friendliness."

In reality, every national news agency pretty much conforms to the same facts of main stream stories, because they all get them from the same news services, like Rueters, NPR or Associated Press.  It's the "analysis" or "editorial" articles and stories that lead us in one political direction or another.

Thanks to everyone who shared information, I really appreciate it.  I dunno if I am just an idiot (very possible) but it was mentioned in the above video that people tend to gravitate to news media that shares their views and beliefs.  I don't.  I just want the story.

I have a hard time understanding why this can't be so.  Is it because sensationalism sells?  Is it because advertisers dictate what stories and spin to apply to the news?.

What I could really relate to was when the guy on the left in the video mentioned that if the news were unbiased then theoretically everyone would draw the same conclusion.

The news, especially lately, has me wondering how accurate the reporting is.  I'm trying to learn how some of you guys deal with this.

Thanks for all the help!!

I probably didn't make my point very well.
There are two ways to inform.
One; the entertainment way,  is to push the information out to the consumer.
Two; you pull the information out and evaluate it.
The video points that out.
When you allow someone to package it up neatly for you
they bias it.
Years ago I was on a C band satellite setup.
I watched Rodney King riots in raw form as I could get the Raw
real time feeds from helicopters and TV trucks.
I watched Dan Rather pick his nose as he waited to do his Desert storm
Saudi Arabia stand ups.  That "slick stuff" you see is surprising
boring and takes a lot of time.
I could then also see the final edited forms you guys saw on your local TV stations.
I could not believe they were recorded on the same world.

They have since scrambled most C band,  kind of like they do Police
radios these days so us common folk can't know the real stuff going on.

My point is whenever it gets packaged it is biased.
The video basically says the same thing.

There's an age old newspaper slogan: "If it bleeds, it leads."

News organizations depend on emotional responses of readers & viewers to capture and keep their attention.

It's a marketing "tool" that many industries use, such as car dealers and real estate brokers.  Doing a pure factor-by-factor comparison would mean everyone must price their products at the bare minimum in order to compete.  But if they can reach buyers on an emotional level, the buyers will sacrifice price for perceived intangible qualities, like appearance, location, social standing, or environmental "friendliness."

In reality, every national news agency pretty much conforms to the same facts of main stream stories, because they all get them from the same news services, like Rueters, NPR or Associated Press.  It's the "analysis" or "editorial" articles and stories that lead us in one political direction or another.

"news services, like Rueters, NPR or Associated Press"
News services I NEVER read or trust.

"news services, like Rueters, NPR or Associated Press"
News services I NEVER read or trust.

Yeah, over the years, those agencies that used to be "THE" sources for all news have been taken over by the Liberal media giants.

Ever notice how all the MSM talking heads say the exact same thing, word for word, as if they were all provided scripts?  Those agencies have become the script writers.

Thanks to everyone who shared information, I really appreciate it.  I dunno if I am just an idiot (very possible) but it was mentioned in the above video that people tend to gravitate to news media that shares their views and beliefs.  I don't.  I just want the story.

I have a hard time understanding why this can't be so.  Is it because sensationalism sells?  Is it because advertisers dictate what stories and spin to apply to the news?.

What I could really relate to was when the guy on the left in the video mentioned that if the news were unbiased then theoretically everyone would draw the same conclusion.

The news, especially lately, has me wondering how accurate the reporting is.  I'm trying to learn how some of you guys deal with this.

Thanks for all the help!!

You have to realize that everyone is biased and sees things differently.  The media.  You.  Me.  It's from upbringing, experience, and who you're around.  What you would consider "unbiased" is probably biased reflecting your beliefs.

Best thing to do is listen to both sides of the issue or news, research it yourself, and come up with your own conclusion.

The worst thing you can do is accept something at face value because you like it or it aligns with your beliefs.  Be skeptical of everything especially things that you like to hear.

I purposely look for articles of coverage from the range of bias. Well, except for Perry. Hate that guy.

When I used to travel out of the country to work, my opinion was that many international coverage seemed more neutral, even CNN World. I actually enjoyed listening to the Japanese news coverage of current events in the US. It was often quite entertaining.

My wife (and I admit at times, myself) loves to watch K-Dramas.  So a good portion of our tv time is on Korean channels. 

Sometimes when the news come on we just leave it on the station even though as they cover the news we have no idea what the hell they are talking about.  There were times they would show events happening in the US like DNC or RNC events or the riots in Portland, Wisconsin, and other parts of the country.

Wish I could understand Korean.  Maybe I'll log on to the BBC network.

unbiased?

i dunno, got fed up with Fox in 2004 with that fool o'Rielly and his trashing of the Swift Boat guys, and defending Dan Rather.

No TV "news' at all since then.  Have a few websites that collate stuff that I can sift through and go to links if interesting. 

Sure to be similar to other 2AHawaii members as to sites. 

No, democrat underground and huff & blow are not on my iist.

unbiased?

i dunno, got fed up with Fox in 2004 with that fool o'Rielly and his trashing of the Swift Boat guys, and defending Dan Rather.

No TV "news' at all since then.  Have a few websites that collate stuff that I can sift through and go to links if interesting. 

Sure to be similar to other 2AHawaii members as to sites. 

No, democrat underground and huff & blow are not on my iist.

When it came to bias, O'Reilly definitely ran the gamut from overly fair to way off base.  He gave many guests the benefit of the doubt even though the facts were undeniably against them.  He also condemned others without proof.  But if evidence later proved him wrong, he'd make a point on his show to issue a complete correction and apology to the audience and the guest/subject.

To me, he seemed more openminded than anyone on CNN or MSNBC, and if he got it wrong, he wasn't above admitting as much.

I'd never stop watching an entire network over one show.  Luckily 95% of the CNN/MSNBC shows are complete garbage.  Makes that decision much easier.   

To counterbalance the anti-Trump MSM, I watch OAN (One America News). You can call it biased but provides a counter-balance to see what the left leaning media is not reporting on Trump and current events.

There’s also the anti-CCP news channel NTD America.

There’s also JustTheNews which supposedly is going back to the roots of traditional journalism of just presenting the facts.

Finally a bunch of channels on YouTube like Tim Pool, etc.  and of course 2aHawaii!  Use your own judgement on what to believe or not on these threads. 

I'd never stop watching an entire network over one show.

Have nothing good about Fox lately,   I just got sick of the TV thing once finding online sources were easier to read and think about.

Just not a TV person.