I'm always irritated when news sources ( almost all of them now) give an obvious political slant when reporting the news. I don't need to hear a news anchor's opinion on what someone was thinking when they said xyz.... I can interpret that myself. Years ago people just reported the news and left the American public draw their own conclusions. I found a news source that does just that and they are very accurate and up to date. Go check it out...
Real News no Bull

I think the multitude of news sources, information sources in general, allow us to better recognize political slant in reporting. I don't know that there was ever a time without political slant in the reporting. It was just a little before my time but the reporting in WW2 was closely controlled by the federal government to make the population think the war was going better than it was. Several disasters went unreported because of the negative public reaction that would have resulted.

It's not just how the stories are slanted, it's which news stories "they" choose to report on, and which ones they choose to ignore. I prefer to look at multiple sources, for that reason.

Its all bad stuff anyways.I don't watch the news.

Anyone happen to use ground news ?

I don't think there was ever a time when news outlets reported just the facts in an unbiased manner.

The owners and controlling interests of news outlets have always tried to steer the narrative to their way of thinking.

They use omission, innuendo, bias and outright lies to accomplish that.

It happens everyday on news outlets biased towards both sides of the political spectrum and always has.

I really like this one: Citizen free press, check it out.

https://citizenfreepress.com/

Try this app.

That certainly was true with the war in Vietnam.

No such thing as unbiased reporting. It's human nature to lean one way or the other. Maybe it's the time restraints of getting the most stories in the least amount of time. Not really a good excuse, though.

One of the things that gets my goat is when a reporter is going to "tell you all you need to know". Sometimes that should be "all we want you to believe".

Just my opinion.

why won't the Founder ('Jon') list his last name?

I tried to see for myself, but many of the articles are for subscribers only.

based on some of your posts, I have to wonder (since I can't see through the paywall myself) just how unbiased they are.

Bloomberg definitely has a left leaning bias,,,,

But they do a good job of televising major events realtime(press conferences/ economic data/world events)

It’s up to the individual to use your own brain and formulate your own opinion

Just a few years ago Lester Holt of NBC News claimed they had to report it that way because the average American wasn't smart enough to decide what was right

If anyone watched NBC news I think Lester was right.

True, and it is not the questions they may ask in an interview but the questions they won't ask.

IMO, most are just running away from outlets that post news on the lunacy of the left saying its not "news".

Newsmax

FOX, except they still allow a lot of Neocon input.
MSNBC, for laughs.
Newsmax, for domestic news.
Al Jazeera, international news.
RT (Russia Today), for perspective.

The main problem I have with all US news sources is that you will get almost no news regarding what is happening in the rest of the world.

Reuters world

This!