Why do people consider Al Jazeera as a trusted source?
-
I noticed a good amount of people talking about Al Jazeera in the BBC paywall thread and that make me ask, why!?
Imo it's not about saying this or that org is least biased or less biased, it's acknowledging the biases present in all news orgs and comparing the reporting from multiple sources.
-
It kind of makes sense in the US, because the US is CONSTANTLY at war with someone / something, so unless people volunteer, there's a good chance the draft would be back and a bunch of people would be forced to go.
"Thank you for your service. Better you than me amirite.
" -
I noticed a good amount of people talking about Al Jazeera in the BBC paywall thread and that make me ask, why!?
Al Jazeera is the mouthpiece of a hostile foreign power (to me). Its also sickeningly, cloyingly coated with hate for the US throughout any segment. I will on occasion read something that's been generically reposted, recognize the writing style, and then confirm that it came from AJ. Its so tilted that it reminds me of Fox News. And I don't watch Fox News either.
-
"Thank you for your service. Better you than me amirite.
"I can say both of those things with genuine respect. I thought I was going to get drafted into Desert Storm. I don't like sand.
-
Be careful with the taking average mindset. It's a default human one, and it's being abused. A lot of media outlets (particularly American right wing) are mouthpieces for the same few groups or people.
Instead, try and look at their biases. Do they have a reason to mislead you. What akin do they have in a particular game. E.g. the BBC is still fairly unbiased on a lot of world news. They are far less unbiased on middle eastern politics now.
It's an annoyingly complex problem to solve, on the fly.
Ya. A nuanced media net is the only real answer. Trying to balance one liar against another rarely results in balance.
-
I can say both of those things with genuine respect. I thought I was going to get drafted into Desert Storm. I don't like sand.
I agree. Almost as coarse and rough and irritating as getting blown up by an IED.
-
There are places (Ground News is a good one IMO) where you can see how biases are broken down by factors like factual accuracy and political alignment.
I check my 5 free articles on Ground News practically daily. Ugly site. It points out some ugly things about us.
-
Scepticism should always be applied to any state-run media.
Is it better for media to be privately owned by billionaires?
-
I noticed a good amount of people talking about Al Jazeera in the BBC paywall thread and that make me ask, why!?
Their original staff was a bunch of pretty serious journalists sourced from the BBC.
-
I noticed a good amount of people talking about Al Jazeera in the BBC paywall thread and that make me ask, why!?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Becuase it was founded with the same journalistic practices as the BBC.
-
I noticed a good amount of people talking about Al Jazeera in the BBC paywall thread and that make me ask, why!?
As we quickly learned during the George W Bush era, no news media agency can be trusted. To counter this, check reporting of the same incident from multiple news agencies and find the consistent facts. Everything else is suspect.
In a hurry, see if Reuters or AP has covered it, but verify when you have the time.
Done this way AJ is perfectly viable as a source for news, in that the bias can be filtered out.
FOX and OANN are known to lie or misrepresent facts entirely, but that gets filtered through cross-checking.
Trust, but verify.
-
I noticed a good amount of people talking about Al Jazeera in the BBC paywall thread and that make me ask, why!?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]A pretty long track record of high-quality journalism. Same as the BBC.
Sure, they're owned by Qatar. As of last I checked it serves as more of a status symbol than a propaganda outlet, though, at least in English.
-
Is it better for media to be privately owned by billionaires?
No, definitely not. I don't think there is any news source I would trust 100%. You need to seek out multiple sources and try to sus it out yourself. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle. I don't claim to have all the answers but in my experience state media tends to be less than trustworthy. I'd say BBC is okay but they've had some big fuck ups before.
-
I noticed a good amount of people talking about Al Jazeera in the BBC paywall thread and that make me ask, why!?
There's a saying among BBC journalists that all who work there eventually end up at Al Jazeera.
Watch one of my favorite documentaries of all time, Control Room (2004) about coverage of the Iraq War.
Al Jazeera is far from perfect, and I'd argue has fallen from its peak in terms of quality. But it's still worth viewing to get a more well rounded perspective.
Now do I believe they can cover topics that hit close to Qatari interests? Not necessarily. For those I take with a grain of salt.
-
Yes and that's a damn strong argurment on why it's a bad idea.
and it most leans right wing too, which is even worst because its more or less propaganda.
-
Al Jazeera is funded by the Qatari government. Make of that what you will.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The BBC is funded by britain
-
Scepticism should always be applied to any state-run media.
Private media is not any more trustworthy than state run.
-
No, definitely not. I don't think there is any news source I would trust 100%. You need to seek out multiple sources and try to sus it out yourself. The truth is usually somewhere in the middle. I don't claim to have all the answers but in my experience state media tends to be less than trustworthy. I'd say BBC is okay but they've had some big fuck ups before.
in my experience state media tends to be less than trustworthy.
How did you determine that?
I’d say BBC is okay
You haven't been watching their year and a half of genocide support?
-
Private media is not any more trustworthy than state run.
Please refer to the other comment where I address this.
-
Be careful with the taking average mindset. It's a default human one, and it's being abused. A lot of media outlets (particularly American right wing) are mouthpieces for the same few groups or people.
Instead, try and look at their biases. Do they have a reason to mislead you. What akin do they have in a particular game. E.g. the BBC is still fairly unbiased on a lot of world news. They are far less unbiased on middle eastern politics now.
It's an annoyingly complex problem to solve, on the fly.
E.g. the BBC is still fairly unbiased on a lot of world news.
No? Why do you think this?
They are far less unbiased on middle eastern politics now.
Have you considered that you may have only noticed that they're aren't unbiased on the middle east.
