Trustworthy publications

>>9090960
I'm a Canuck so I read The Star, National Post, and browse a few local papers (fuck metro land, also please employ me)

Outside of that I'll read the Walrus once and a while, Macleans, not many other magazines for news

Websites I'll usually read online versions of newspapers I read plus CBC for national news and BBC or Aljazeera for international news

>>9091020
Please be a troll.

>Muh news source isn't """"""""""""objective""""""""""""
Kill yourself
I read IB Times, The Hill & Reuters for news, The American Conservative and The Week for propaganda and ProPublica and Public Discourse for bantz

Could anyone weigh in on the Financial Times? As far as UK publications go I haven't noticed an overt bias, unlike the Daily Mail (right wing half-truths or outright bullshit) or the Guardian (liberal cuckoldry).

>>9091040
What is it you object to?

Do you read The Sun or something?

>>9091074
It's pretty much the only sane daily in the UK. Worth every penny. The Economist is great too. There are biased views, but they're not trying to hide it or present as absolute truth and overall quality of journalism is usually high.

For German language I'd recommend SZ, FAZ and Die Zeit.

>>9091074
The Times and The Telegraph are the only respectable British publications, but they've got some absolutely retarded columnists that would be more at home with the Guardian.

The Mail on Sunday is kinda the opposite, they've got a couple of good columnists that get drowned out by shit.

>>9091105
How's Bild? I've seen some high quality Daily Mail articles reference it occasionally.

>>9091106
>The Posh Sun and The Torygraph are the only respectable British publications

>>9091120
t. Guardian reader

>>9091112
It's Daily Mail style populistic trash. Not quite as insane, but really trying to be. If you want a good factual overview with little bias, then Spiegel is great.

>>9090960
my fucking sides when two french magazines got together with Facebook and Google to fight "against Fake News"

Fucking liberal cucks that lied about Trump 24/7 and chances are in such a state of cognitive dissonance never seen before lFAO

>>9090960
whatever don delillo reads

>>9090960
/pol/ is the only trustworthy source for real information at this age

>>9091212
>What are Paul Joseph Watson's YouTube videos?

File: CNN vs actual event that took place.jpg (35KB, 519x269px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 519x269px

>>9091212
unironically this.

File: image.jpg (80KB, 846x480px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 846x480px

>>9091219

M-M-MUGH-M-MUGH-MUGHRRR-MEEEHTEUUURGH

>>9091220
That picture doesn't contradict what the actual article says.
>>9091242
UH FOOOOKIN UR EYE NAHL

>>9091220
CNN employ a similar tactic to the BBC, report wildly inaccurate "breaking" news, wait until they the initial hype has died down and then go full damage control on the article with corrections.

I only trust the Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and Bloomberg.

>>9091264
>The Washington Post
Its still shitposting even if your being ironic.

Foreign Policy
Financial Times
RT/Pravda

>>9091279
t. Trumpian

They haven't led me wrong yet, and Bezos' wealth protects their journalistic integrity.

>>9091131
I'm not sure about that, A lot of the time it feels like people hate Bild because their willing to report what other outlets aren't.

For example:
http://www.bild.de/regional/hannover/festnahme/lehrer-moerder-gefasst-44976390.bild.html

>>9091105

Thanks mang, I think I'll buy a few copies of the FT and see if it takes me to a subscription. My only problem might be just how much of a chance I get to read it with my busy lifestyle.

>>9091106
>>9091120
There is no quality daily worth reading in the UK any more. The telegraph and guardian are partisan as fuck. the mail is for retards who don't know they are retarded ('middle england'), the indy is now buzzfeed, and rrupert murdoch owns the times.

The observer isn't bad, but that's sundays only.

L R B
R
B

>>9091894

Hence my earlier question about the FT. It seems like an honest, in-depth read. I have no illusions about whether or not it has an agenda or political preferences, but at least it isn't 1,000,000 NIGGERS COMING TO OUR SHORES TOMORROW, BAN THIS SICK FILTH.

>>9091894
>The observer isn't bad
The observer is recycled content from the Guardian and the Independent.

Everything is biased and you have to read a ton of different stories to get any semblance of accurate reporting. It's barely worth following current events. Exactly what the Jews want.

>>9092130
The way of thinkign that "its too hard to get reliable information so I dont do anythign" is exactly what powers that be want the average person to think

its a massive psy-op
that, hilarious enough, failed during Trump v Clinton

I read the NYRB, and then some artices in the new yorker or the atlantic. you have to be careful with them the guardian is sometimes good

Literally all the journals and sources mentioned in this thread are complete trash. Well, I guess if you follow this advice >>9091212 at least you won't be have to wonder about the veracity of the information kek.

But I especially want to point out that you should, under no circumstances whatsoever, fall for the LRB scam. It's the worst literary journal I have had the misfortune of being subjected to. It's worse than reading /r/books.

That said, TLS is decent. It's got its up and down, and there's usually a couple of great articles in each issue, and a couple of meh and occasionally terrible ones. But you have to live with that.

>>9092202

*ups and downs

The Economist is solid for keeping up-to-date on world affairs, but in tone it increasingly reads like the final dying (and often pathetic) screams of a crumbling world order.