Ok - we all know we have our own "SLANTS" and views on every political debate today... but.... WHO'S THE MOST RELIABLE? For me it's NPR - then Reuters - BBC - then mlsnet.com WHO'S THE MOST EMOTIONALLY CHARGED? Fox News - someone must have spiked ridalin in the coffee again WHY DO THEY EVEN TRY? Clear Channel News - why did they even try - stick to creating monopolies BEST BRITISH SOURCE? They're all good. If we could only trade. BEST AMERICAN SOURCE? Weekend News on SNL
because they just started - and who knows if they'll be even be around next month - starting a network ain't easy just look at UPN They started w/Star-Trek but had to wait eons till thier next hit "moesha" I say MLS should get a contract w/UPN - maybe we'll become thier next big hit - it'll be all MLS - all the time "UPN the Official network of MLS" * *might not be true
[sarcasm]nice job making the vote anonymous[/sarcasm] so c'mon... who is going to confess that they think fox news is the source? don't be shy
For so-called "hard" news, I usually start with NewsMax, then WorldNetDaily, and then Drudge, so I can get a feel for what the liberal media is talking about. I do occasionally like some lighter news, so I tape Extra, Access Hollywood and ET. After that, it's a quick glance at People magazine (never been much of a reader, but I do love their "Rants & Raves") to find out what's going on in the rest of the world.
You have politics on one hand. The rest of the world is not Michael Jackson, Brittnet Spears, Janet Jackson and the monkey, Bubbles!
This was my first thought after reading the choices. My second choice would have been "The Onion". So I had to vote for my third choice.
The Economist is my favorite source, but you didn't include it. After that comes AP, Reuters and NPR. I seldom watch TV news, and only then for sports and local coverage.
I voted for AP because I read my daily paper religiously, and they are a a major source, so it's not a choice but necessity. When I really want to get a feel for what's going on, I go to the Google News page.
I went with the AP because of my local pape. Other than that, it's Rueters, NPR, here, and CNN if I want entertainment news. If I feel like getting mad, I read whatever Mel posts. I haven't tuned into FNC in years even though I still drink coffee from my free Fox News Channel "Fair and Balanced" travel mug.
Big Soccer NSR first. Then Thomas Flanigan for Women's issues. Karl Keller to learn the truth about Kerry. Mel Brennan for the truth about America. JoePak for religious perspective and spiritual enlightenment. Segroves for sober analysis. SoFla and SuperDave for everything else.
I get my news from blogs. And I'm not ashamed. Although I should be. I guess I am. I'm seriously thinking of not posting this. Sure doesn't give me a lot of room to make fun of Sludge and NewsWax. Oh, well. MLSnet.com it is.
WSJ for business (Financial Times annoys me), Economist for international stuff, NYTimes and Daily Show for domestic; along with the front page of yahoo, which I check frequently.
The WSJ has some excellent news reporters. Absolutely first-rate. It's their op-ed page that is populated by wackos.
They will occasionally have decent contributing op-eds. By default I ignore the ones written by the paper's staff.
I can't really take them too seriously until they run a correction on the op-ed that stated that Vince Foster was murdered. Still waiting for that one.
One of my old professors used to write op-eds for them, and he was on Clinton's Council of Economic advisors. They contributors aren't all bad.
Ah, so you're a Pokuist now, then. Excellent. The One True religion of Pokuism shall enlighten the world one mind at a time.
I'm surprised all jokes aside - no one has mentioned the London Times - for the people who know thier UK news is this a quality paper? Is it akin to the US's Wall Street Journal? I've never really had a chance to look at it - I must admit though, I've been impressed by the Guardian on more than one occasion.