News and trust

It seems as though every day brings out a new trust issue with the news media. It is very worrying that apparently Russian trolls not only sewed division in the US election they also trolled the UK referendum on the EU. I think they are well pleased with the result in both cases.

I’ve been turning over in my mind what news media to trust and what to reject. It is rarely a clear cut distinction. Among newspapers the tabloids can be rejected, Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Express, Daily Mirror. They rarely resort to outright lies but the twists are so large as are the omissions that they don’t stand as reputable sources. With the broadsheets it is vital to allow for their bias. The Guardian has very left wing stance and its coverage while detailed reflects this. The Daily Telegraph has been captured by the Brexit section of the Conservative Party and needs to be read with that in mind. The Times has its prejudices  ( anti royalist for example ) but it gives wide and reasonable coverage. The Financial Times has a strong free market  stance but its coverage of economic and business news is unrivalled. On the other hand the Financial Times demands some knowledge of economic and market jargon.

As might be expected the internet sites of the UK newspapers follow their printed stance quite closely.  Outside these almost all news sites range from dodgy to worthless. Social media is infested with lies and has nothing worthwhile to offer the news seeker. For informed comment outside the sphere of news Wikipedia is surprisingly good. The range of information is immense although sometimes poorly presented.

The internet does offer some information not easily found elsewhere. The TED talks are given by individuals reckoned to have specialist knowledge. They can be opinionated but informative. Youtube has the whole gamut from informative to cranky daftness. Some daftness comes from conspiracy theories. Ie such as the Apollo missions didn’t really land on the moon, it was all done in a film studio. Conspiracy  theories are mostly hogwash; humans have evolved to see patterns even though sometimes there are none. Conspiracy theorists twist the facts beyond all recognition- avoid

Television is a rather dubious area. The BBC is fairly good. Its news bulletins are often fairly limited and they have a clear bias towards certain subjects. However their facts are trustworthy. Similar comment could be made about ITN. Beyond these is pretty much a fact free zone. The US CNN are worthwhile for giving an American view which is often strangely blinkered. Channels such as RT are propaganda channels and replete with false information.

Weekly magazines vary immensely. The pick of the bunch is the Economist. Despite its title it is a news magazine with a section devoted to business and economics. The Economist generally has a liberal free market stance. Its items are full of information so even if your conclusions are different at least they are well informed. Of all sources the Economist is probably the best.

New Statesman and New Society are generally rather left wing but New Society has items which would never be found elsewhere. The Spectator is generally right wing. There are many magazines which are mostly apolitical and devoted to particular topics. Some more general ones such as New Scientist don’t hesitate to put forward opinions but these are fairly well separated from news items. 

There are some general observations. Donald Trump who has protested most about false facts is the biggest liar of all; politicians have always twisted the facts but he has carried fact twisting to a new level. Be sceptical -every news story I’ve personally been close to has been misreported in some way. Look for evidence. Assertions without any evidence are always suspect.

Ask yourself whether the “fact” is reasonable and fits with what is known. Extreme facts require powerful evidence from two or more sources.