I have listened to a couple for a while now one really acts nuts sometimes, but he is often correct more than the others. Like the commercial use to say, " you can learn a lot from a dummy". https://www.infowars.com/
We still, and will continue, to watch CNN. None of our local news stations cover "around the U.S. or World news", so only alternative we have is CNN. There are those that don't like CNN, but then again, there are those that don't like a lot of things that others like.
Ok, you got me Al, we do get World news from these networks. As far as CNN goes, some people like this network and others don't. Same way with everything else in life, people like certain things, while others don't.
Thats good Cody. It just seems major news sources don't give us 'all the news'. Not that it really matters anymore so much going on now.
LOL I just saw this one , and its so true they puppets that work for them actually believe what they are told to sayl.
Whatever news source is cited, there will be those who will point out that these are not objective news sources, and mostly they will be right. Most news sources today are either leftist, rightist, or downright crazy, and those that people, often on both sides, will point out as mainstream, are among the most leftist. There are very few reliable objective news sources, and perhaps none at all. People who consider themselves to be conservative will often point to Fox News because they include people on both sides of the political spectrum and because many people consider neoconservatism to be at a point between the left and the right, but Fox is not objective - it has a bias toward neoconservatism, which interprets conservatism as being unwilling to keep our noses out of everyone else's business, anxious to go to war at the drop of a hat, often financing both sides, and always willing to sacrifice individual rights for federal power. Perhaps a more effective quest, rather than seeking the objective news source, would be to differentiate those news sources who value the truth from those whose news model is to take a side and pursue it at all costs. Unfortunately, those are hard to come by, too. Of those mentioned here, it would be a hard sell to hold any of them up. Both Breitbart and Epoch Times are right-of-center publications, which means that they are not objective news sources, but their news model seems to be, to tell the truth in what they publish but to leave the leftist point of view out altogether. More than any, Breitbart is diligent about naming its sources, so if they are wrong, we can know where it came from. That's better than the lies we get from CNN and most of the mainstream media, such as MSNBC and the New York Times, which will simply make stuff up and cite unnamed sources, as long as it helps their side or hurts the other side. On the other side of the equation might be NPR. To be honest, I don't pay a lot of attention to NPR because if Joe Biden were caught openly molesting an eight-year-old in the Oval Office, they would avoid the story, but I haven't seen outright lying from them.
Wasn't Infowars founded by Alex Jones? He's the guy who claimed the Sandy Hook school shootings were "completely fake" and "manufactured."
Infowars I have not been following Infowars for the past few years, so this may or may not still be true. Infowars has always been a rightist publication. When I was following Infowars, it seemed to me that the inaccuracies that would appear in its news from time to time were related to their policy of wanting to be first with the (rightist) news, unfortunately often at the expense of the truth. I didn't get the feeling that Infowars lied, but that they failed to have a high degree of checks and balances before they reported a story, similar to what the National Enquirer has done. A lot of people don't realize that the Enquirer has broken several significant and true stories but, in between, they've published a lot of stuff that turned out to be little more than nonsense.