animal planet wrote:
Reading is only good if what your reading is honest and truthful.
That's roughly true.
animal planet wrote:
You’ll never get that from the likes of The NY Times and some of the rag magazines out there.
I look at the following online: 1.: The local newspaper, 2.: Al Jazeera world news, 3.: The Guardian, 4.: New York Times, and 5.: Washington Post; and usually once or twice a day I hear headline news from 6.: kpfa.org; and then fairly often I also look at 7.: Al Jazeera U.S. & Canada news, 8.: OnePoliticalPlaza (which is not exactly for news but occasionally gives some worthy news), and 9.: whatever comes up when I do a search on some topic (I've noticed businessinsider.com sometimes pops up with something I find interesting in these searches, but search results also go further afield than that).
When I search the internet, I use duckduckgo.com which doesn't track, rather than google.com which does track the user and gives the user what it thinks the user wants to see, thus making a confirmation bias.) (More rarely I go a step further to avoid confirmation bias, which is to search for each of two conflicting phrases and then comparing the two sets of results. Note that quality is worth a lot more than quantity.
Then on rare occasions I try to find more international sources of news; for a little while I looked at rt.com, and later a Nigerian news outlet (they seem very Christian fundamentalist), DuMonde Diplomatique in English, Swedish news in English, and Der Spiegel in English. It would be better if I could read news in other languages but I'm only fluent enough in English.
Epoch News (which I used to get in print) has a series telling the evils of the Chinese Communist Party, which I think is a good series (though I didn't read it all), but the rest of the main part of Epoch News seems to have succumbed to false conspiracy theories.
Addendum:
One can find anything on the internet, but that doesn't mean it's true. There are web pages that "prove" the world is flat, and other web pages that say it's round like a ball. Since the two sets of web pages conflict with each other, you know that some of them are not really true. But even the false ones might still be honest and sincere. To figure out which set is true requires some thinking or experience, or probably both thinking and experience. Trust in authority doesn't always work.
Addendum #2:
And then there are books.
One time I deliberately bought a book by an author I didn't like or even hated. That was Anne Coulter. I got the book with the idea that maybe I would learn something different there than I did from my usual sources. I got a third of the way through it. She did have a useful comparison between Phyllis Schlafly and Gloria Steinem, which was thought-provoking, so I guess the book may have been worthwhile.
But more often I get a good book or two, and sometimes read them entirely. I tend to remember a long time, and make up for lack of quantity by thinking more.
Addendum #3:
Youtube: Information on youtube ranges from awful to great. There are TED talks on youtube. The physicist Sabine Hossenfelder is informative and entertaining. There are a couple of comedians who are also good commentators: Trevor Noah and Roy Wood Jr. Roy Wood Jr., with others, produced a little entertaining documentary on gun culture in Switzerland. I think it's quite informative and worthwhile. Roy Wood Jr. and his coworkers are also good at commenting on racism. If anybody wants to understand racism in current-day America, look up Roy Wood Jr. on youtube and see what he and his coworkers say about it.