The Guardian as a news source.

Yay?  Nay?  No one cares?

I have been reading that source from time to time and the articles seem well written and informative.

Is The Guardian a good source for news or is it something I should double or triple check?

Triple check any "source" of news. 

Usually factually accurate, but opinions and the angles skew too far to the left for my liking.
 

Decent news source. Not the best. Triple check anything politicky. 

It's considered a newspaper of record in the UK. Generally good content for the most part, but like any media outlet in modern times, feels awful clickbait-y at times.

I agree that you should always check a few *reputable* sources (i.e., not trueworldnews.biz) before taking anything as fact, but you could do a lot worse than the Guardian.

These guys rate it pretty much the same as popular news channels in the US (BBC might be a better option?):

https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart

Of note: the chart above is effectively a "news" item.... so... don't be entirely convinced, but they seem to do a decent job from what I have seen.

I'm not sure if Cleavland's baseball team can be considered a credible source of news.

Is this Guardian web site   the same as the UK newspaper ?

it always seemed to be full of click bait , but maybe that's how the Internet is these days 

I find the onion the be the most reliable of any news sources. 

Thank you all and thank you aircooled for the list.

Very good in terms of factual accuracy from my experience, opinions lean left.

Mndsm said:

I find the onion the be the most reliable of any news sources. 

They've definitely got it down to a science.  Seems like every other day you see something from 4 years ago that is applicable to today.

In reply to Mr_Asa :

Idiocracy was satire, right up until the overall stupidity of the human race proved it to be a documentary.

It's a shame any news source needs to be labeled as leaning any direction. 

Steve_Jones said:

It's a shame any news source needs to be labeled as leaning any direction. 

Well if you can't figure it out yourself then you might as well get some stranger to figure it out for you. 

I use this when I find a news source that I'm not sure about. It's a media watchdog organization that rates the source by bias (Progressive/Conservative) and reliability. 

https://adfontesmedia.com

Here is info about their methodologies: https://adfontesmedia.com/how-ad-fontes-ranks-news-sources/

Here is what wikipedia says about them, including criticism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Fontes_Media

I have been using 3 news sources lately. 

One is the 1440 Daily Digest. It's a daily email that covers the news highlights in few words. Zero opinion, just a short statement of facts with links if you want to do more reading. It is free, just sign up for it. It does have ads interspersed in the email. 

The other is The New Paper. Also a short daily email. Also zero opinion. The cost is about $5 a month. No advertisements. 

The last is Ground News. It is a phone app. Basically, a collection of news collected from many sources. It has a grading system that grades the article as Left, Center, or Right. 

I avoid bias and sensationalism by avoiding the news altogether.

If it is important enough, I will hear about it or notice it actually happening.  Otherwise, 90% of news is self-fulfilling prophecy and/or tempests in tea cups.

The accuracy of The Simpsons is unquestionable.  You just have to wait 20 years...

In reply to Duke :

I, too, have been using the ostrich-head-in-sand approach to improving my mental health. And with success!

Steve_Jones said:

It's a shame any news source needs to be labeled as leaning any direction. 

Any news source will have bias by definition.  Even if the reporters and editors are doing their best to remain objective, a news source has limited space for articles and some human needs to decide what potential stories are and are not "news worthy".  That decision is made based on the values of the person making it, thereby biasing the coverage.

One needs to be careful about labels in international contexts though.  The BBC might be center by British standards, but they're not by US ones.

The Guardian is a decent paper/website for news and I've been reading it for a long time.  In the runup to the Iraq war after 9/11, they had very different (and mostly better) coverage than any US paper.  Oddly enough, American Conservative was another of my go-to reads during that time and also good.  I don't much care about left/right bias.  I can read through that.  I do care about getting facts right.

Whatfinger.com.....created by veterans, my primary source for what is really real.....late 

I usually enjoy The Guardian, but I tend to lean pretty left so your mileage may vary.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Grauniad

Duke said:

I avoid bias and sensationalism by avoiding the news altogether.

If it is important enough, I will hear about it or notice it actually happening.  Otherwise, 90% of news is self-fulfilling prophecy and/or tempests in tea cups.

 

If its really important,  I hear about it on GRM.