Hi There !

Many newspapers and magazines today seem to have a "point of view."
That bugs me to no end.

I am looking for a list of newspapers and/or magazines known for
unbiased coverage.  EXAMPLES:

The Economist
Wall Street Journal
Scientific American
London Times


In the old days, I would have included the New York Times.  I'm not
sure now whether it should be on the list or not.

A 5-star answer would be 15 such publications.  No supporting
documentation or web sites required.


Thanks mucho!!
ron

Hi! Thanks for the question.

Here is my list of what I perceive as unbiased newspapers and magazines.

1. USA Today
2. BusinessWeek
3. Forbes
4. Red Herring
5. Business 2.0
6. Fortune Magazine
7. Harvard Business Review
8. Reader?s Digest
9. Smithsonian Magazine
10. Sports Illustrated
11. PC Magazine
12. Inc Magazine
13. San Francisco Chronicle
14. Washington Post
15. TV Guide

I hope this would be of help to you.

Regards,                              
Easterangel-ga                              
Google Answers Researcher

Easter, you are an Angel !

Thank you!
ron

I like The Weekly Standard:

http://weeklystandard.com/

PinkFreud----thank you for your consideration...

...as always!

ron

-I would have to disagree with USA Today (questionable), and the
Washington Post is out of the question.

In the general category of magazines devoted largely to social,
political and economic issues, I believe that the Atlantic Monthly in
recent years has shown itself to be the least driven by a partisan
political or other ideological agenda.

Thanks, lordspade.  I appreciate your comments!

ron

markj----I agree completely.  Whereas most publications have become
more slanted over the last 20 years, the Atlantic Monthly seems to be
moving the other way:  toward more objectivity.  That's refreshing.

Thanks, Mark.
ron


P.S.   I saw a poll comparison earlier today.  In 1974, 52% of
Americans respected the media and 20% respected the military.  In
2004, 22% respected the media and 72% respected the military.  The
world keeps turning...

This looks to be one of those arguments: "if they don't agree with me
then they are biased."  What kind of metric do you use to determine
bias?

The New York Times is often considered left wing because the right
always can point to editorials attacking Republican Administrations.
However, the numbers show that the NYT attacked the Clinton
Administration even more often than the current one.

There is also the split-personality problem with many newspapers. The
WSJ, for example, has a pretty professional reporting staff. However,
their editorial staff is markedly biased - to the point of ignoring
their own reporting and stating flat-out lies. The editorial pages of
most of the rest of the major newspapers usually present a mix of
opinion ranging from far-right to medium-left. (The rightness or
leftness of editorials have the potential of being objectively
determined by referring to polling data to see how they agree with
right and left segments of society.) The Wall Street Journal is an
exception in allowing almost no nonconservative op-eds.

Newspapers also have at least two major institutional blind spots, one
which favors the right, and the other the left. Most newspapers are,
understandably, strongly protective of first amendment rights. Because
that is their job. In this, they are biased in what is normally
considered a left direction.

On the other hand, newspapers have limited resources and so will spend
more ink on themes that are pushed at them harder. These themes are
generally those favored by moneyed interests since they are the ones
that can afford the implicit and explicit propaganda. (For example,
take a look at a typical union's spending on PR compared to an
equivalent corporate spending.) In addition, there is the corporate
ownership of the media issue.

On the list above, I would strike off Forbes and the TV Guide (when
was the last time they gave an unbiased review of a stinker movie?). I
would suggest the Financial Times, The Christian Science Monitor, and
Knight-Ridder newspapers.

timely opinion piece by Howard Fineman that refers to the AMMP (the
American Mainstream Media Party) and calls Karl Rove a "direct-mail
expert".

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6813945/

mczagros---thanks very much for your comments.  I appreciate it !

ron

grthumongous----excellent!   Thanks a million.

ron

I reccomend news.bbc.co.uk and reuters.com and www.timesonline.co.uk
and interestalert.com

I am not a fan of any US news outlet (too many years outside of the
border), but for your local news sometimes the best bet is to go to
your local stations internet site. As crazy as it is, they actually
give you your local news there unlike there wasted space on air.