I generally try to stay informed on current events. With the exception of what gets posted here, I normally get my news from CNN. I tend to lean left politically, but not always.

The problem I always run into is that every news site I read, regardless of where they stand on the political spectrum, is always filled with pointless bullshit. Specifically, sports, celebrity news, and product placement. “Some shitty pop singer is dating some shitty actor” or “These are our recommendations for the best mass-produced garbage-quality fast fashion from Temu” or “Some overpaid dickhead threw a ball faster than some other overpaid dickhead.”

What I’d love to find is a news source that’s just news that matters. No celebrity gossip, sports, opinion pieces, etc. Just real events that have an impact on some part of the world. Legislation, natural events, economic changes, wars, political changes, that kind of thing.

Does this exist, or is all journalism just entertainment?

  • єχтяαναgαηтєηzумє@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Sounds like you’re looking for independent journalism, I’m in the same boat. I’ve found checking commondreams.org, scheerpost.com, therealnews.com, unicornriot.ninja, fair.org, thecanary.co, leftvoice.org, consortiumnews.com, labornotes.org, and popularresistance.org/news make for a great news feed. Those are an array of independent news outlets which keep it almost entirely just news. Setting up an RSS feed with these sites would be a solid move to ensure your getting news with none of the BS.

  • Oneser@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I can recommend Reuters, given it still has a little bit of sports and opinion, but I find it’s good at providing neutral facts and sources it’s knowledge from appropriate experts for its opinion pieces.

    It only lacks in providing local level news, where I turn to my country’s national broadcaster.

  • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 months ago

    News is a service that determines what’s newsworthy and summarizes it. You can’t do that without bias at some level.

  • lud@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 months ago

    I recommend news agencies* like Reuters, AP, and AFP. If you want to just get pure news.

    *News agencies are companies that primarily sell news to other companies like CNN.

  • Vinny_93@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think what you’re describing is the need for RSS feeds. Generally, news outlets categorise their articles neatly so you subscribe with RSS to only headlines, or world events, or whatever. It requires you to have a look around the news site in question and setup RSS correctly.

    The other neat thing is that you can read all your RSS feeds (ie multiple news sites) in one reader and there are tons of custom RSS apps.

    I share your disdain for gossip and mainstream money grab promo. And ads. My god how much do ads suck.

    • zelifcam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      It’s funny how often this is brought up and how the answer is that’s it’s been solved since nearly the begging of the web.

      I’ve been using an RSS manager / server for decades! Right now it’s FreshRSS as the server and using Lire as a client on iOS. There’s arguably no better way to consume content.

    • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      News sites often have multiple feeds, but many these days don’t. And the feeds still aren’t as granular as I’d like sometimes. My regional newspaper has a feed for news more specifically local to me, but it’s bogged down with children’s sports and obituaries.

      I think my dream setup would allow some intelligent filters to get rid of any categories I just don’t care about, and any “top 8 widgets to do X” filler advertisement articles. Also, a way to lump together all news articles covering the same story, so I could either choose which outlets to actually read/compare, or mark all as read.

  • comfy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’ve had great experiences with reading socialist news sites. They tend not to care about ‘the spectacle’ and don’t like ads. Although you still have to avoid the ones like WSWS who just use it as a platform to call other socialists ‘pseudo-left’.

    Side note: There’s a great famous analysis of the US media in the book Manufacturing Consent. You can find a PDF online, but at the very very very least you should read the Wikipedia summary. It explains the reasons why media organisations almost inevitably have some of these biases and bullshits.

      • comfy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        “World Socialist Web Site”, the paper of the Socialist Equality Party (who, in my personal experience, are toxic idealists who will counterprotest pickets and any union action whatsoever)

  • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I like to listen to NPR’s up first. They don’t have too much time to editorialized. I’ll then go to AP or Reuters if I want to follow up on something.

  • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    1440 is what I use. It’s literally bare-bones news articles devoid of any opinion, just facts. They cover both US and international news, and have small culture and sports blips that aren’t click-baity. And it’s emailed to you every day. :)

    • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’ve not read 1440 at all, so this may or may not apply, but I’d offer a word of caution to any news that purports to be “just facts”. You can absolutely promote an agenda with only facts by choosing which facts to publish (and what stories to even cover). It’s sometimes better to aim to get news from sources that are just very transparent about their biases instead of claiming they don’t have any.

      • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t think it’s better to go for highly biased news at all, I don’t care what the reporter thinks or feels about the facts, I just want them. The overtly biased news outlets are filled to the brim with opinion. If there are facts a story is leaving out, it will eventually get to me through the absolute garbage microphone that is social media, and I can check out the sources from there.

        • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          All news has a bias, some news just doesn’t tell you what their bias is. I’m not advocating for intentionally aiming for biased news, I’m advocating for knowing what the bias of the author/editor of the story is, so that when you read it, you know what conclusion they might be trying to lead you to. Even if a journalist tries their best to be impartial, that’s not possible, and like I said, it’s very easy to tell a one sided story with exclusively facts.