Sounds like you want random conspiracy sites and the like, which don't really qualify as actual news sources.

Start here

http://weeklyworldnews.com/

 

Al Jazeera are pretty good, and they have an English language version.
BBC News is good.

 

As opposed to the epidemic of fake news sites we have?

How on earth did you get to that conclusion? Reuters, AP, AFP, BBC, CNN, News Corp - all owned by different large companies.

Are you confusing the celebrity pages of the Sun with hard news?

Ah, you don't want news, you want random unfounded rumours and conspiracies then.

 

Seconded Al-Jazeera. Channel 514 on Sky.

 

Don't forget www.abovetopsecret.com

 

it concerns me that you consider the news on TV news it's tragedy, followed by sport, a stock ticker and ends with the weather.

best to read magazines or newspapers if you want a little more depth than a headline and sound bites.

PS I think Katie Couric is hot

 

Best thing to do is to just monitor a wide selection of news sites. I've bookmarked around 25 combining mainstream with the more "independent" along with a few of the more "out there" sites...

The ones I go on the most are Al-jazeera, BBC, Guardian, FT, France24, PressTV

As with all journalism there's a certain agenda with each one but you just have to figure out if it's a similar agenda to your own....

 

Both the Guardian and the BBC have no shareholders as such and so are not operated to maximise profits.

 

I use Information Clearing House - it's a site that pulls many stories from different agencies.

I think it's one of the best news sites - but then I suppose it depends whether or not you want to read what the rest of the World thinks or are happy with what our national media has to offer.

 

. . . and long may this remain the case

 

Still doesn't stop the Guardian writers being idiots, especially when it comes to sport. Which is more important to me than politics.

 

In what way "idiots"?

Do you have any examples of this?

 

You can literally see the emotional turmoil spilling of it's pages on the news stand. I really can't stand the Guardian for politics, you'd get less biased reporting if you read the "Iranian Post"!

Then again, the culture sections of Guardian are rather good!

 

The Guardian's criticism's of Newcastle football fans shouting "Mido, he's got a bomb you know."

The Guardian, so quick in it's defence of any any minority failed to recognise that this wasn't anything to do with 'Islamophobia', as the Guardian dubbed it, but more to do with the fact that Mido resembles the shoe-bomber Richard Reid, rather than the fact that he's a muslim. Private Eye magazine also pointed out this resemblance months ago, but the Guardian, once again in their hurry to condemn 'racism' complete missed this as well.

In the very same game Mark Viduka was called a "fat aussie *******" but this was ignored, I assume because he's not black/a muslim?

There's plenty of other rubbish like this throughout the paper as well IMO.

And before you attack me ad hominem, I'll say that I'm not some 'liberal hater' or 'right wing nut.' I don't read the Guardian but do read the Times, Independent and Le Monde.

 

So, the one and only example you can offer is that on one occasion, in your unsubstantiated opinion, the Guardian objected to abuse directed at Mido but not to abuse directed at Viduka solely on the basis that the former was Islamophobic then?

And based on that, you describe the Guardian writers as being being "idiots, especially when it comes to sport."

Frankly, I really don't think that you are in any position to describe anyone as an idiot.

 

You asked if I had any examples and I gave you one. I guess it is my 'unsubstantiated opinion', but have fun trying to defend the situation, what is the difference between the two situations? Why is one worse?

And no, it's not just based on that, that's the Guardian's whole ethos. 'Oh god, someone made a joke about a minority, STOP THE PRESSES!'

I don't see how I'm not in any position to call anyone an idiot? Unless you mean no-one is in that position? If not, that's a very discriminatory view to hold, especially from someone defending a paper that stands for equality and is Britain's, self proclaimed, leading liberal voice.

Try reading a decent left wing paper, I don't think there's many (if any) in the English language but they do exist.

 

I think they are too, for roughly the same reasons. I also lump into that group people who ask for examples, are given one, then resort to personal insults. Mind you, that just makes you look like an idiot, so maybe theres a difference.

 

You could always try The Independent.

 

The Indy is no longer a newspaper it's a Global Warming fanzine.