Ask HN: Alternative” News Source That Counters Major Attitudes? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Alternative” News Source That Counters Major Attitudes?

9 pointstslmy14 comments

Hi friends,

Could someone recommend to me an "alternative" news source? A news source that focuses on similar topics as the big names, CNN, CNBC, NPR, etc., but tries its best to counter the idea often promoted by those major sources?

Such as: Assuming CNN and NPR are going very pro-Trump one day (assuming), the "alternative view" news should sound very anti-Trump in the mean time. I think an alternative view into news helps one forming a critical thinking mindset.

Just shower idea.

Apologize if it's already a thing -- Don't know how to phrase that into a search term.

View on HN

Don't look for sources that are biased in a different way. The solution to spin in the news really shouldn't be spin in the opposite direction - that would just add another source of misinformation. The solution is consuming only solid, fact-based journalism with reliable sources.

Also, not every issue requires "balanced" views - if the news is extremely negative/positive regarding a certain problem/person/party, that's fine as long as the news is supported by facts. Adding "alternative" news would be adding lies in that case.

Thank you for pointing out that -- if I may use a metaphor -- toxic medicine will not counter an existing intoxication. Just to be clear, I'm not trying to learn facts by consuming news. Rather, I simply wish to have an opposite sound inspiring me to think "ah! Interesting view -- I may also be able to come up with some alternative view on my own beliefs/writing/work." In other words, I'm looking for a news source that, combined with easily reachable opinions, easily constructs some "debate 101"-style, try-coming-up-with-different-opinions, practice-backing-up-both-sides material. It's not really related to learning something from the news, but thanks for warning me against the worse.

Most alternative news sources lack fact checking and are pretty much blog rants about something the writer doesn't like.

Correct. I should have emphasized more on my requirement of basic fact-checking.

Why would you assume a news source that automatically contradicts the mainstream media would promote "critical thinking?"

For that matter, why the implicit assumption that stories presented by mainstream media always need to be "countered," but not stories presented outside the mainstream?

These are brilliant questions, Krapp! Now that's some critical thinking I want to practice. To answer your questions: (1) I'm seeking for a news source that could ignite some "ah! interesting view -- never thought about that before" moments. I think that would be helpful after my getting bombasted by the 5 news channels (which usually shares similar attitude towards topics) every morning and just before I getting emotionally carried away. (2) To answer your second question, we need to clarify what I meant by "alternative news source." I consume news from China, Japan, and the US everyday. Each country would have its own "mainstream voice," and it would be inaccurate to call any of them "THE mainstream" or "THE alternative." Therefore, my definition of "mainstream" is not country/party-specific. Rather, I define "mainstream-ness" with accessibility. Which side of the story am I getting bombasted on? Which news channel pops up everywhere on the TV at my local pub, in streetside news kiosks, and in my podcast feed? And what tone/attitude/opinion they share towards topics? Answer to these questions would be considered "mainstream" to me. Therefore, it's not about "always countering which news sources." I should have phrased myself more like, "What are some news sources that specializes in giving voices to minorities (NOT esp. ethnically)?"

Thank you for your questions. They have been very provoking.

The only real solution to this problem is reading a variety of stories on the same topic. Left, central, right, countercultural, local, and so on.

You are right, but at times I find it difficult to collect the variety on my own -- without knowing what side of story each news source would present makes it unrealistically time consuming to do so. Rather than conducting some serious research into a topic, I would prefer if I can simply have a news source that deliberately counters the voices of major news channels.

I like the Economist which I think does a good job of providing an outsiders view of American politics as well as context on how a story has other implications. Not sure if their coverage of UK politics is biased or not.

Economist sometimes do a poor job of fact checking their journalists. I also like the Economist, but it’s not perfect. You still have to think for yourself and try to cross validate the information

Thank you. I will add Economist to my list.

I've found the FT (i.e., Financial Times) to be useful. The writers like to poke fun at themselves from time to time.

Agreed, it doesn't matter if you have a local variant in their trademarked light salmon color :-) Solid journalism, non biased and self critical. And sure that's not a 100% score but still best paper.

Thank you for answering the question! I will look into Financial Times.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com