
Ask HN: Alternative” News Source That Counters Major Attitudes? - tslmy
Hi friends,<p>Could someone recommend to me an &quot;alternative&quot; 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?<p>Such as: Assuming CNN and NPR are going very pro-Trump one day (assuming), the &quot;alternative view&quot; news should sound very anti-Trump in the mean time.
I think an alternative view into news helps one forming a critical thinking mindset.<p>Just shower idea.<p>Apologize if it&#x27;s already a thing -- Don&#x27;t know how to phrase that into a search term.
======
altairiumblue
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.

~~~
tslmy
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.

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

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

------
krapp
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?

~~~
tslmy
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.

------
keiferski
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.

~~~
tslmy
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.

------
wj
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.

~~~
surfsvammel
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

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

~~~
mikebos
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.

