the purpose of this thread is to establish what publications will get you laughed out of the soapbox. i figure some are obvious, some not so obvious.

hopefully the commentary here can be directed towards the publication itself rather than the user asking the question.

for example, im genuinely curious about the soapbox's opinion of:

the washington times
the washington post
chicago sun times
reuters

thread could also be used to share alternative media sources that might not have been used / considered before? could be an informative / handy thread as long as no one gets butthurt when their favorite source is ridiculed.

7/22/2011 8:28:40 AM

I look through reuters sometimes. The others are sorta "meh" but I wouldn't call them bad sources.

7/22/2011 8:39:10 AM

The Washington Post is the dominant newspaper of the beltway, and it has some of the best coverage of the inner workings of the Federal government, defense, and all the players that surround it. They've had several major investigative coups ranging from Watergate to the recent Walter Reed scandal, and they have the Pulitzer Prizes to prove it. While their writing isn't as strong, it's probably the closest thing to a domestic rival that the NY Times has. I'm not sure why it's being questioned as a source.

Reuters is useful as a raw source of news, but I wouldn't consider it a source of good analysis.

The Washington Times seems to have decayed in respectability between the Moonies and the strong right-wing slant its taken. The paper still has a strong heritage however, but I don't hold it in the same respect as the Post.

7/22/2011 10:41:15 AM

The Washington Times has a few respectable straight news writers (that is, right-leaning straight news), but their editorial page is one of the most absurd things you've ever seen.

The Post is a fantastic paper, and it's editorial staff is way better than the Times', which is filled with cranks and limp-wristed liberal centrists. And Ross Douthat. Friedman and Brooks are worth reading.

Chicago Sun-Times - Still exists?

Reuters - Analysis can be a bit strange, but they do deserve credit for pumping out a shit ton of it, particularly in the realms of economics and national security/terrorism.

(I'm not sure why any of these would be mentioned in a list of "questionable sources.")

In before News of the World.

[Edited on July 22, 2011 at 12:13 PM. Reason : ]

7/22/2011 12:11:41 PM

ah i didnt say they were questionable.

just when i was doing my usual drudgereport-based romp around various pages i was noticing who i was being linked too.

the majority of things i was viewing came from these and i had the idea for this thread.

7/22/2011 3:08:35 PM

^^ I read the Sun Times everyday, it's one he'll of a read. Where else can you find the bi weekly incoherent rant from Jesse Jackson and my personal favorite Mary Mitchel? Also it's the best way to monitor the constant crime wave that festers on the south side of Chicago. I like getting one Monday during lunch and enjoy reading all the articles about how people were shot over various "disrespect" situations over the weekend . Its a good read though and you get a hot chick in color in the sports section, and the trib dosent print Marmaduke.

7/23/2011 12:35:48 AM

i get my news from z magazine

7/23/2011 10:16:43 AM

I know a good number of people use it, but I would give a shout out to the English language al Jazeera. They are probably the most respectable of the non-Western English language news sources and have the best coverage of regions outside of the traditional focus of Western journalists.

I'm also somewhat skeptical of all English language articles coming out of Eastern Asia (the English language editions of Korean, Japanese, and Chinese newspapers for example). If you can read the newspapers in their original language, they provide a lot of great coverage and very blunt discussions, but they do a lot of self censoring in their English language editions, towing the official line and papering over hot topics of discussion. It's as if they're cool with aggressive national debate (including China), but they don't want the outside world to read it.

7/23/2011 12:45:58 PM

Tigerbeat

7/23/2011 12:53:42 PM

^
+1

7/23/2011 1:20:10 PM

Quote :

"the washington times the washington post chicago sun times reuters"

First off, you named 3 papers and one wire service. Totally different things.

I don't remember a time when the Washington Times wasn't the safe mouthpiece for the GOP. The Post has conservative columnists. The Times does not. It's not taken seriously by most people who think newspapers aren't supposed to be just like magazines like National Review or whatever.

Reuters, as a wire service that doesn't do opinion, is probably better on a global scale than AP but less comprehensive domestically.

Sun-Times is a local Chicago paper. I have no idea why you included it. I do enjoy Roger Ebert, though.

7/27/2011 5:01:20 PM

I ♥ the St. Petersburg Times, because it is the home of Politifact.

7/27/2011 7:06:48 PM