...as they dive for page three

Boobs. ...... The readers.

---

Tabloid newspapers misreport news with lurid headlines to sell copy

Though frequently the UK tabloids had the best sports reporting when I lived there.

That's very telling, isn't it?

---

Reality Internet Personality

Indeed it is ....

Bread and Circuses

---

Reality Internet Personality

I've not read a newspaper in years. I've found that npr radio, BBC online, google news, and Nbc news online gives me a blend of news that tends to avoid all the name calling and opinions that one typically gets from a Faux news. Granted not every story is slanted politically and I do read a few stories from Fox through Google but I typically look for other reported stories from other sources to complement the Fox story.


I do get tired of the socalled liberal bias in media message put out by so many radical righties. Pretty much every newspaper in the US is owned by a Ardent conservative. It also seems odd that as they bought up all the newspaper their readership vastly decreased. Of course that is mostly due to the internet but partly due to the cost cutting and lack of anything substantial reporting done locally. Most local news is reporting accidents and big crime stories that were already available online elsewhere.

So newspapers are dying a slow horrible death that is inevitable because they are unable to adapt and change.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

The local press is really vanishing.
Some years ago I used to get three "free" local rags appear every week. The same stories in each, just a bit of a delay depending when they happened. Now we get none. I don't bother with the local rag, as its about 90% adverts for things I never knew I wanted, and the lead story is always a "heart-tugger"....

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

I don't bother with the local rag, as its about 90% adverts for things I never knew I wanted, and the lead story is always a "heart-tugger"....

90% adverts, yep that's how it is here too and the price keeps increasing. I'm just about done with it though, don't have a bird besides it would be good for a couple more pints a month. (^;

---

...

Ok, I am late to the party. It helps to speak more than one language. Sure most news sites want your Euros, Dollars etc, but I still glean enough to hunt down what I wish to know more about.
I don't trust translation sites. I have seen plenty of garbage.
If you want a true translation, contact a friend you trust.

---

Pluto will always be a planet to me.

Seti Ambassador
Not to late to order an Anni Shirt

Ok, I am late to the party. It helps to speak more than one language. Sure most news sites want your Euros, Dollars etc, but I still glean enough to hunt down what I wish to know more about.
I don't trust translation sites. I have seen plenty of garbage.
If you want a true translation, contact a friend you trust.

Most reputable newspapers publish in several languages, with just about all of them having an English edition.

If they cannot ensure the translation is correct, as per how it was originally intended, then who can.

Der Spiegel is at http://www.spiegel.de/international/

And if you don't want the BBC in English then it has this selection http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/languages/index.shtml

I was going to list "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" but Ess and Gone Fishing beat me to it.

I also think Al Jazeera tries to play with a pretty straight bat as does Deutsche Welle.

The Australian ABC used to be pretty good, but because of the number of spurious claims of "Left Wing Bias" brought by various conservatives that literally flooded its editorial review committee to the point that it choked, it has actually turned into "Murdoch Light". It's News and Current Affairs programs quote the Murdoch papers more than any other source.

A typical case is the current events in Syria where the Australian news outlets were all playing the the "Assad bad, rebels good" line even before the gas attack.

T.A.

R.T. news, fox, cnn.

Then I read many papers, I look for a second and I hope a third confirmation.

I also read many internet sources, that shall remain unnamed.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

R.T. news, fox, cnn.

Then I read many papers, I look for a second and I hope a third confirmation.

I also read many internet sources, that shall remain unnamed.

The questioner asked for unbiased news sources. I think you find at least one of your choices in the top three of biased news programs.

Here's a page with some explanation

Which is correct?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/06/august-employment-report-economy-analysis/2772907/

First Take: Jobs report nearly cinches Fed tapering

Now may not be the right time for the Federal Reserve to lay off on buying bonds, but today's jobs report basically cinches the notion that it will curtail its long-running stimulus very soon.

The economy added 169,000 jobs in August — a bit worse than the consensus estimate of 180,000, and in range of the prior 12 months' average of 189,000. The Fed has indicated clearly that maintaining the economy's path is enough for the central bank to wind down $85 billion of monthly bond buys to zero by mid-2014.

OR

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-06/treasuries-extend-gains-as-economy-adds-fewer-jobs-than-forecast.html

Treasury 10-Year Yields Drop From 3% High on Slowing Jobs Growth

Treasuries rose, pushing 10-year note yields down from 3 percent, after a report showed the U.S. added fewer jobs than forecast in August, damping speculation the Federal Reserve will slow bond purchases this month.

Yields advanced to a two-year high before the Labor Department report showed the economy added 169,000 jobs last month, compared with the median forecast of 180,000 in a Bloomberg News survey.

Both reports say the same thing about the number of jobs. One then without any other support launches into an opinion of what it means. The other presents some supporting numbers for their opinion.

Which one do you believe?

---

I mostly boycott all Fox programs because I don't like Murdoch. In a miniscule way I hope to make his programs less attractive to advertisers.

---

Which is correct? I think they both are correct in the numbers used but that is all.

Which one do I believe? Neither for one is a forecast and the other is an analysis. For me both are opinion driven. Only the passing of time will prove or disprove either of these.

---

...

Sorry I am not sure what you are pointing out. As to what ever the government publishes I look at it with some suspension first much like everything else.

I thought it was common knowledge that the work force is getting smaller just from baby boomers peaking out.

---

...

Raw data such as Guy pointed out means little with out correlating with other raw data. To do that meaningfully one would have to have the functional equivalent of a graduate degree in economics, something most people don't have or want.
IMO, most people use their news sources to do that for them.

---

J Mercer,

What I'm pointing out is the percentage of people who CAN work who ARE working.

This is a way of looking at our job numbers without concern for the demographics of the baby boomers who are reaching social security age and are no longer in the market for a job.

Looking just at unemployment numbers (based on new unemployment insurance claims) and job creations (based on polling some of the bigger companies throughout the U.S.) is less informative of what's happening to our economy. And the numbers you see in the news (A) always come out late on Friday and (B) are almost always adjusted down a week or two later.

The labor participation rate is the percentage of people who CAN work who are currently employed.

If the labor pool increases and the number of jobs available remains the same, the labor participation rate drops.
If the labor pool decreases and the number of jobs available remains the same, the labor participation rate increases.
If the labor pool increases and the number of jobs available increases, the labor participation rate remains the same.
If the labor pool decreases and the number of jobs available decreases, the labor participation rate remains the same.

This number is now the lowest it has been in 35 years.

And these numbers are straight from the BLS. I understand your scepticism of numbers created from government sources. I am sceptical of numbers coming out of government sources also. The BLS doesn't paint as rosy a picture, so of course you're not going to see this chart very often in the news.

And betreger,

I do have a graduate degree and I find that I'm capable of critical thought about issues outside my graduate degree. Other people like Dr. Ben Carson (FOR PRESIDENT!) can do this also.

[bait] And of course, I'll never give you my opinion with out first consulting with Rush Limbaugh to find out what his opinion is so I can repeat what he says without having to think about it for myself. [/bait]

---