CDZ Best International Media Outlet

[Onyx]

The poll options were based on a simple criteria. These are all high profile media outlets that have a television branch covering world news, and report in the English language.

 

[Onyx]

I personally like BBC World, France24, and Al Jazeera.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I personally like BBC World, France24, and Al Jazeera.

Why no CSPAN?

 

[Onyx]

Why no CSPAN?

They are not international and their "news" extends to filming government proceedings. They broadcast in only several countries, whereas the ones I listed broadcast worldwide.

 

[MisterBeale]

Never watch the shit, it's all lies.

 

[Picaro]

The Economist is the best all around, for it's variety and depth of coverage and details; it's biased politically and ideologically, but they make their opinion parts obvious and don't try to hide them, and they report the bad with the 'good'. The illiterates will just have to rely on TV sound bites, and miss 90% of what is going on.

 

[waltky]

Noticed Taipei Times wasn't on the list...

... nor the Australian.

 

[Picaro]

Noticed Taipei Times wasn't on the list...

... nor the Australian.

Been a long time since I've seen one of those in a newsstand or bookstore. I bet most Americans don't even know they exist. And yes, they're very good and still practice real journalism.

 

[Onyx]

Noticed Taipei Times wasn't on the list...

... nor the Australian.

I clarified in my OP that the poll was only considering international media outlets that broadcast on television.

 

[usmbguest5318]

How is it Reuters and Der Spiegel are not on your list? Reuters is so neutrally objective that they occasionally get ridiculed for it.

Anyway, Reuters would be my pick of all the ones I consume. Of the ones on your list, BBC.

 

[william the wie]

Bloomberg is also an important non-mention.

 

[heil hitler]

Why do people think that the BCC is this great news source? They are primarily funded by the British Government. The British Government have destroyed many of the basic rights of their people...yet the BBC is just a trustworthy peach?
Think you dimwits.
RT...the same...DW..the same...Press TV...the same (Iran)...NHK...France24...
These are GOVERNMENT funded 'news' outlets. Not all bullshit but definitely be careful.

 

[Onyx]

How is it Reuters and Der Spiegel are not on your list? Reuters is so neutrally objective that they occasionally get ridiculed for it.

Reuters should of been on the poll. Der Spiegel is a newspaper, which doesn't meet the criteria I outlined.

 

[Onyx]

RT...the same...DW..the same...Press TV...the same (Iran)...NHK...France24...
These are GOVERNMENT funded 'news' outlets. Not all bullshit but definitely be careful.

Most international televised media receives some level of funding from governments. Some are obvious mouthpieces like CGTN and RT, but others like France24 and Al Jazeera are not.

 

[Picaro]

Reuters is crap. So is Al Jareeza. Nothing they wouldn't pass off as real news if it was favorable to terrorists and supports genociding Israelis. They buy a lot of their stories from 'palestinian reporters', and other alleged 'independents'.

 

[usmbguest5318]

How is it Reuters and Der Spiegel are not on your list? Reuters is so neutrally objective that they occasionally get ridiculed for it.

Reuters should of been on the poll. Der Spiegel is a newspaper, which doesn't meet the criteria I outlined.

Fair enough. I didn't pay close enough attention to the text in the OP. My bad.

 

[Onyx]

Reuters is crap. So is Al Jareeza. Nothing they wouldn't pass off as real news if it was favorable to terrorists and supports genociding Israelis. They buy a lot of their stories from 'palestinian reporters', and other alleged 'independents'.

I know imperialists such as yourself are not big fans of media outlets like Al Jazeera, which are on the forefront of reporting war crimes and crimes against humanity around the world. After all, the US and Israel are some of the biggest perpetrators of them.

With that said, one of the reasons Al Jazeera became reputable was because they provided fair coverage to all sides during conflicts, unlike the other state media in the Middle East which reinforced sectarian beliefs and engaged in smear campaigns.

 

[heil hitler]

RT...the same...DW..the same...Press TV...the same (Iran)...NHK...France24...
These are GOVERNMENT funded 'news' outlets. Not all bullshit but definitely be careful.

Most international televised media receives some level of funding from governments. Some are obvious mouthpieces like CGTN and RT, but others like France24 and Al Jazeera are not.

How do you reason that? France24 is solely owned by the French government...how are they not a government mouthpiece? It is overtly obtuse to suggest that RT is a mouthpiece and the French are suddenly trustworthy?
Stop.

 

[Onyx]

How do you reason that? France24 is solely owned by the French government...how are they not a government mouthpiece? It is overtly obtuse to suggest that RT is a mouthpiece and the French are suddenly trustworthy?

For starters, France24 doesn't take direction from the ruling administration and has a good impartiality rating. France24 often has very critical coverage of its own government, which wouldn't make sense if it were a government mouthpiece like you claim.

On the contrary, RT creates narratives designed to advance Russian interests and undermine enemies of the Putin regime. They act in perfect coordination with state media, and have a reputation for interviewing anti-western critics and highlighting anti-western conspiracy theories.

 

[heil hitler]

For starters, France24 doesn't take direction from the ruling administration and has a good impartiality rating. France24 often has very critical coverage of its own government, which wouldn't make sense if it were a government mouthpiece like you claim

You are losing the forest for the trees. It's not the verifiable untruths...it is the head turning away from the whole truth.
Look no further than their coverage of the Syrian conflict. They thoroughly covered the West's opinion, Hollande's, yet nothing from the other side. When the rumors were dispelled by UN inspectors...crickets. . The same can be said for bombing his own schools and hospitals. This was taken either out of context or misreported. Yet when where is the correction when the opposite is proven? Crickets. Sure, if you want the western mainstream approach from one side of the spectrum then sure...BBC...CNN..F24...go with it. Yet you will get the left approach every time...half truths...half of the story.