this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2023
29 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43408 readers
1678 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
RSS feeds from PBS and NPR
Both of them have truly neutral coverage, as in they report based on fact and reality and don't limit what they write in order to maintain some false sense of neutrality. Many news sites nowadays play down objective fact in order to maintain "neutrality" between one side of the political spectrum that believes in evidence and statistical fact and one that expressly does not.
This of course means that they're seen as being "anti-Trump" or "anti-Republican" but in actuality it's reality itself that is anti-Trump and they just report reality.
I would caution against putting so much faith in them both so strongly. They both favor American establishment liberal politics, which is transparent to many due to the fact that a lot of Americans agree with those politics, and that they appear very reasonable in comparison to whatever tf Republicans are up to on a given day.
It's not a bad thing that they tend to have a very dry and straightforward tone, but all outlets are biased, and it's important to remain critical at all times if you want to have an accurate picture of a current event.
Oh fully agree, of course. Every once in a while I see a neoliberal dipshit in their opinion columns making some abhorrent take, but generally they're significantly better than WaPo, NYT, CNN, Fox, CNBC, NBC, or CBS.
Some other good ones are Reuters, Al Jazeera, and the Associated Press, which of course each come with their own set of biases as well. Reuters is also fairly establishment liberal, Al Jazeera is useless for any news about the Middle East, and AP's opinion and analysis columns lean pretty conservative.
My comment was more in the sense that a "neutral" news site is one where they do not suppress facts because those facts favor a perceived "side" of a debate, which is becoming increasingly common as major political parties in the US and abroad start pushing outright falsehoods in their rhetoric.
As someone that's never used RSS, how does it work?
You install an RSS reader app on your phone or computer and subscribe to the feed links. Those contain some metadata for each story and a link to the content. The RSS reader will display everything in a readable way.
Is there an RSS reader with built in comment sections?
What XML link do you use for them?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/feeds/rss/headlines
http://www.npr.org/rss/rss.php?id=1001