h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'm just reading 'Flat Earth News' about distortion in Journalism.

If we don't believe the newspapers, and take the TV with a pinch of salt what do we believe? How do we know what's true in the world?

Where do we get our news?

Satire.

In more seriousness, I don't. I read a paper and see slants everywhere. I watch the BBC News and am frustrated by the short, bitesize snapshots of issues that I can't possible understand in 2 minutes.

So I bury myself in my life and ignore the bigger picture. And sometimes read the local paper to know what's going on around me.

I've never read the main section of a newspaper: when I have had them, I've stuck with the supplements, which seem to take a wider perspective on things. However, turning to the wider media, I am reasonably trusting, except that I'll filter it through my own common sense. If something seems fishy, I won't take it at face value until I've had it in a bit more depth and from multiple sources.

I'm not sure 'believe' is the right word. It sounds a bit too much of a commitment for me.

I have varying levels of trust in the motives of the news providers, but you can also learn a lot from those you cannot trust.

>>I'm just reading 'Flat Earth News' about distortion in Journalism.

Ive been bigging that up lately. The reason is its by Nick Davies, the freelance who broke the NoTW stuff with the Grauniad.

Its revealing when he talks about how commercial and organisational pressures affect what we see. Take local papers. They have been so pared back that their one or two remaining staff simply dont have the time to do any journalism. Go out and interview someone? Do me a favour! Its type type type until the white space is filled.

So if an organisation sends them an e-mail...Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V.

What is a "newspaper"?

Seriously - who pays money to read about something which, if it happened at all, happened at least 24 hours ago? Call that "news"? Maybe when the fast form of transport was a good horse. Meanwhile I've got the BBC News app on my phone. Newspapers? Just a moment while I put down my snuff box and put in my monocle...

And who believes anything they read on teh intarwebz?

I think believe is the wrong word too.

I start with the assumption that all news media have a bias. This is only a problem if the bias isn't overt or known. Then having and utilising critical analysis is important. Who wrote this, are they credible, where are they getting their information from, what are the politics involved etc?

I get most of my news from the internet (blogs more than mainstream newspapers or TV networks) and people I know. I'm at least as interested in what people are saying about the news as the news itself.

I consider the MSM to be distinctly biased but in a strange way. The problem isn't the bias, but that so many people who rely on the MSM seem unaware of the bias and think they are getting the Truth

Broadsheet newspapers write stories with a bit of insight. I'd expect to read a more rounded treatment of the story. It's Channel Four News to ITV's News at Ten, The Radio 4 Today Programme compared to Radio 1 Newsbeat, it's h2g2 to the Wikipedia of BBC News Online...

I can read all that stuff, for free, on my phone. I'm just curious who's still actually paying money for a physical object made of wood.

For free?

Most of my 'news' comes from the bbc on the Today program or breakfast news program. I accept that there is always a bias, and factors I may not be aware of affect what they do and don't report.

The only paper I pay money for is my local weekly one, as much to see if my goddess friend has managed to have her picture in there again as anything else - is uncanny how the photographers just love her...

It is handy to get the stories bout upcoming events nd to find out about local stuff tht I wouldn't hve found online easily, and read the letters from nutjobs. I tend to buy it and read it on a friday while the boys have their lunch - is part of our routine now.

I've also bought a couple of handy things from the smll ads.

If I get a paper I get 'i', as they have little space for filler I can get the salient points in a fairly easy to digest format. I can then catch the news or the BBC website if I'd like to know more details about a particular story.

The problem with news and news journalism is that although most journos will relate the same facts there is always going to be a bias on the story depending on their own views- political or otherwise-, and, to a degree, what paper or tv station they work for. You can see that at work on here sometimes, given the wide ranging views of the good people on H2G2.

Theres the other kind of bias, too. As Chris Morris put it, Facts x Importance = News! Different papers cover different stories or give different emphasis to them. This is a good reason for triangulating between a range of sources. We need al-Jazeera etc etc as well as the BBC. (I *hate* the BBCs online and TV coverage, btw. Their Radio is rather better, if you discount John Harrumphries.)

I still buy a Dead Trees paper, btw. (I bet you cant guess which. ) Partly force of habit. Partly because I find them easier to browse. My reading style is to scan through, stopping at occasional stories and editorials and I find that much easier in newspaper format than phone.

Plus...have you ever tried swatting a wasp with a phone? Bad idea!

I stopped buying newspapers a few years ago. In fact the last time a I bought one about a year ago, was entirely for using it to light a bonfire in my garden.

I use radio and internet. Mostly 5live in terms of radio. And C4 news and Newsnight for more analytical approach. Yes it's seen as a bit tabloidy but 'Drive' is excellent in my opinion and the presenters are always humorous and are really very good.

I reckon I'm reasonably good at reading bias and in any case its impossible to be totally objective as the *facts* in some cases are impossible to ascertain. Also what's selected out of all the myriad bits of news is to do with what editors choose to highlight.

I don't expect *belief* so it doesn't bother me. But so long as I keep the pinch of salt switched on where necessary, I'm okay with that.

And things like Question Time help to tease things out more in terms of highlighting POVs and angles.

Basically the News is *stories* That's what I bear in mind.

Z - it's a very good question and I'm still struggling with an answer myself. At the moment, my response is slightly split into a theoretical and practical one.

The theoretical response is to say that there is no way to find out what's really going on. You can't even eliminate bias by reading lots of newspapers (as some here suggested) if some of the biases are systematic and the same for all the newspapers. To some extent, I think by reading newspapers we actually get negative amounts of information because it gives us the impression that we know at least SOMETHING about what is going on in the world. But we don't even get that: if the news shows us only examples that suggest that policy X is good, and never examples that suggest that policy X is bad, we do get to find out about those examples (positive information), but we get a very wrong picture about policy X (negative information).

The practical response is: yes OK, but we have to do something. So, I try to find less mainstream forms of news. In my case, that's lefty websites and blogs. But these have their own set of biases, and they themselves mostly get their information from the mainstream news so they have that bias too.

One paper you can always trust...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spvvAdAN5bA

It all rather depends on what newspaper and how extraordinary the news are. I´m more likely to believe Berlingske than BT, though I suppose that means nothing to most of you. I also tend to get my news online, but that´s just for practical reasons. I prefer my news to be accurate rather than fast, so I´m okay with waiting for them.

An extremely left wing German friend tells me that the only UK paper he can stomach is the FT. All the others are too right wing for him - but the FT has straight, comment-free reporting.

Indeed, Fortean Times is worth a read.

In which vein...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sWJuQD0cL8