I read the news today, oh boy

[prillalar]

I don't have a lot to say about the war, other than it looks like Canada won't jump in without a UN Security Council resolution and I'm glad for that.

But I read a story on Wired News today that I found interesting. Apparently visits from America to foreign news websites are way up.

The article suggests that the American media isn't providing any debate about the pro- and anti-war positions or any criticism of the administration. And so Americans are going elsewhere to find it.

They quote an editor from the Guardian:

The only debate in the U.S. media is on the Web, Dennis said. "Weblogs are doing all the work that the U.S. media did in the past," he said. "That's an interesting development."

I don't follow any US media outlets, other than a glance at CNN every once in a while, so I can't speak to this. (I generally get my info from The Globe and Mail.) But I'm interested to know -- if you're an American, are you going elsewhere for your news? How do you feel about your domestic media?

Comments

[thete1.livejournal.com]

I do occasionally check foreign news sources -- the Indian papers keep me full of righteous fury/mortal terror -- but I'm lucky enough to be subscribed to two great local papers in The New York Times and Star-Ledger. Also, the best American paper there is -- the Christian Science Monitor. Don't let the name scare you away. They have the most balaced views and the widest purview I've seen.

[prillalar]

Interesting. I don't think I've ever subscribed to an actual newspaper, though I do read a couple of news mags.

I'll check out the CSM. I don't usually spend that much time on political news, except in situations like this. I generally try to keep up with tech and science news.

I've been trying to read articles from the Globe and Main, CNN, and the BBC to get a fairly broad view.

[thete1.livejournal.com]

If you were going to subscribe to any paper, make it the CSM. And not just because it makes you go to the XF place. *g*

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

*What* domestic media? We don't have any news here; we have news-fo'-tainment.

[prillalar]

I wonder how all the embedded correspondents are going to feed into that. The ultimate reality show, I guess.

[laurashapiro.livejournal.com]

I'm the world's worst person to answer this, since I paradoxically work at a place dedictated to independent journalism (http://www.motherjones.com), and personally tend to avoid news like the plague. It makes me feel paranoid and impotent.

At times like this, though, I usually start on our web site and spread outward to other indy sources I trust, like Alternet (http://www.alternet.org). I still get a fair amount of information from Salon (http://www.salon.com), although gawd knows how long *that* will last. Probably my most trusted resource is the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/), but it gets too real for me fairly quickly, and then I'm forced to go goof off for a bit.

One thing I try *never* to do is watch TV news, lest I become enraged by its biases, shallowness, and pandering. Grrrr...o

[prillalar]

Yeah, I don't like to read news all that often, either. But I try to keep up. I shall take the Guardian for a spin; I'd heard other good things about it.

On Salon, do you read the discussion as well as the articles? I'm used to doing that for tech news, but I don't generally do it for anything else.

[laurashapiro.livejournal.com]

On Salon, do you read the discussion as well as the articles?

Not generally. It's not that I'm not interested, but a) I like to remember to separate fact from opinion when I can, and b) it's a big time-sink.a