reddit.

 

Curious as to what they believe of The Globe and Mail to be of bias? While they may easily come off as "liberal" I notice they tend to flip-flop between right or centre and left of centre. If anything, my personal observation over the years is they've been leaning slightly to the left but still maintaining a small flavour of the right. Interested to see what others think.

 

the argument that was made to me was surrounding the hierarchy of stories. More left wing stories float to the top. Right wing stuff tends to get buried. It’s not every time, but there’s something odd happening, as it’s not purely popularity/clicks driven. Something else seems to bring the more conservative stories to the bottom.

I still like the paper, but as you mentioned, it still has a lean to the left.

 

CBC News website.
Where anyone complaining about anything is considered news.
Investigative journalism and unbiased reporting is so far in their past they probably couldn't do it anymore if they had to.
... painful

Globe and Mail, National post/ Financial Post, BBC. Reuters are my main go-to sources.

 

ftw

mic drop

lol

 

Rennlist OT is all you need. Ha Ha

 

If you want a feel for the potential accuracy and/or bias of a news source, try looking it up at the following. Seems to be pretty well researched and documented.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ .

 

BRB cancelling my subscriptions!

 

Interesting. I played around on that site for a while. The Globe and Mail is considered right-leaning, as is the Financial Post. But The Globe actually gets better marks than the Financial Post, which I didn't expect.

Also interesting to hear that Breitbart and Huffington Post were both set up by the same guy. For profit news in the US is wild...

 

Hehe! Never been there but heard it was an Fn' wormhole that sucks you in.

 

I find the Economist reporting to be often unreliable and misleading. Here's an example but there are many.... The Economist called oilsand strip-mining “One of the bleakest scenes of man-made destruction.” These apocalyptic pictures have become “the coveted oilsands ****” of the industry’s foes. What isn't shown is how the land looks after its rehabilitation, which all companies must fund when they begin operations. The editors also drank the climate change Koolaid and often support Marxist concepts such as corporate social responsibility. I don't know many economists who give this publication much credibility.