Today, most major news outlets in the United States are controlled by a handful of massive, powerful companies, an anomaly called media consolidation. It is vital that Americans become more skeptical of the news fed to them by these huge corporate media outlets and find alternative means of learning about what is actually happening in this country and around the world. They will probably find that reality and what they assumed to be reality are actually very different.
Objectivity, Bias and Talking Heads
There was a time when the nightly news was synonymous with the words objective, impartial, fair and balanced. Reporters, newscasters, and their employers, saw it as a duty and badge of honor to inform the public, as factually as possible, of the happenings in this country and around the world.
No longer. Instead of abiding by the Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics, we have major media outlets and their Talking Heads blindly supporting “facts” as told to them by the government, corporations and anyone else they deem worthy. Unfortunately, as the Iraq war has taught us, perceived truths are not always facts. Thousands of Americans and more than a million Iraqis died as a consequence. It is extremely disturbing that the mainstream media’s abject failure to do its job, with the public's apathy towards demanding that they do so, could result in a "mistake" of such magnitude.
The Media’s Big Six
In 1983, 90% of our media was owned and controlled by 50 different companies – which, at the time, so concerned author Ben Bagdikian that he penned his now classic book, The Media Monopoly. Today, 90% of our news, whether we read, watch or listen to it, is dominated primarily by six media giants which each own an array of media venues, from TV and radio stations to newspapers and magazines to film and production studios. The names may change, the Walt Disney Company now owns most of 21st Century Fox and AT&T is still attempting a takeover of Time Warner, but the fact remains that ownership of the media has consolidated into the hands of the very powerful few:
- Comcast Corporation/NBC Universal
- 21st Century Fox
- Walt Disney Company
- Time Warner
- CBS Corporation
The merging of so many media companies into today’s handful of powerhouses has been sanctioned by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), an independent government agency composed of five people whose duty it is to determine media policy and law. Created in 1934 by the Communications Act, the FCC’s role is to regulate interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable throughout the United States. It wasn’t until the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the first major reform of the policy since it was created, that large corporations were permitted to begin their massive consolidation of the media - resulting in the Big Six.
Real News Versus Entertainment
Why should Americans be worried that only a small number of companies dominate so much of our news? Because with the Big Six’s enormous control over a wide spectrum of the media comes the ability to dictate what events they see as newsworthy (or not) on a massive scale. Especially worrying as these corporations no longer view news as a public service meant to disperse important information and facts but a means by which to make profits by entertaining viewers. Today, the mainstream media determines the significance, and therefore coverage, of an event by ratings and the whims of the political and corporate entities to which they are beholden, not by what is considered to be in the public's best interest.
Don't believe it? Just listen . . . .
It appears that the public’s trust in the media has been declining for some time. According to the Gallup research company, which began its data collection on the topic in 1972, the public’s trust in the media peaked in 1976 but has seen a slow, downward spiral ever since. The most recent Gallup poll, taken in September of 2016, shows that the trend does not appear to be stopping, with 68% of Americans still not trusting the mass media “to report the news fully, accurately and fairly.” A February 2016 Pew Research Center poll came away with an even more dire picture: only 18% of Americans had “a lot” of trust in the mainstream media and only 22% had “a lot” of trust in their local news.
According to Reporters Without Borders, Americans should be very concerned. The organization created the World Press Freedom Index in 2002 and has since compiled data annually on every nation based upon a list of seven criteria categories and indicators. Their 2017 World Press Freedom Index put the United States, a country whose citizens believe it to be a bastion of freedom, at number 43; its first index gave the United States the number 17 slot.
Independent News Options: Keeping It Real
Thankfully, the American public no longer needs to rely solely on one of the Big Six for their information as there are a growing number of independent news sources available to anyone with internet access. The following are only a sampling of those alternatives. Most state that they are “non-partisan, independent and non-profit.” Some are more transparent than others; a couple even outline a code of journalistic ethics their company follows.
General News Sources
- Reason (reason.com)
- The Christian Science Monitor (csmonitor.com)
- Truthout (truth-out.org)
- Reuters (reuters.com)
- Democracy Now! (democracynow.org)
- ProPublica (propublica.org)
- The Center for Public Integrity (publicintegrity.org)
- Reveal (The Center for Investigative Reporting) (revealnews.org)
- AllSides (allsides.com)
- C-SPAN (c-span.org)
- Who, What, Why (whowhatwhy.org)
- The Intercept (theintercept.com)
- Consortium News (consortiumnews.com)
- Mint Press News (mintpressnews.com)
- Newsbud (newsbud.com)
Foreign News Sources
- Arabic: Al Jazeera English (aljazeera.com)
- British: BBC News (bbc.com)
- British: openDemocracy (opendemocracy.net)
- Asian: Asia Times (atimes.com)
- Canadian: Global Research (globalresearch.ca)
- Russian: RT (rt.com)
- International: Fair Observer (fairobserver.com)
- International: Consortium of Investigative Journalists (icij.org)
Sites That Report on Censorship
While most of the following sources do provide some general news, their primary roles are to monitor censorship and the restriction of information on specific topics.
- PolitiFact (politifact.com)
- Open Secrets (opensecrets.org)
- FactCheck (factcheck.org)
- Watchdog (watchdog.org)
- Reporters Without Borders (rsf.org)
- Institute for Public Accuracy (accuracy.org)
- FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) (fair.org)
- Media Channel (mediachannel.org)
- Media Reform Coalition (MRC) (mediareform.org.uk)
- Accuracy in Media (aim.org)
- Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) (prwatch.org)
- CorpWatch (corpwatch.org)
- Corporate Accountability (corporateaccountability.org)
Independent Reporters and Whistleblowers
The sources below fall into categories unto their own. The first is a group of fiercely independent reporters who believe in old school journalism, some with their own websites and articles; the second is a group of several sites that encourage whistleblowers to speak out and provide a forum for their information.
- Greg Palast (gregpalast.com)
- John Pilger (johnpilger.com)
- Nick Davies (nickdavies.net)
- Seymour Hersch
- David Sirota (davidsirota.com)
- ExposeFacts (exposefacts.org)
- Public Intelligence (publicintelligence.net)
- WikiLeaks (wikileaks.org)
How to Separate the Fact from the Fiction
With only a tiny number of companies controlling what the vast majority of us see, hear, read and assume to be newsworthy, it is critical that the public realize that there are options and have access to those alternatives. Yet, even with all these resources at our fingertips, how does one separate the fact from the fiction?
- at the very minimum, your news should be answering what are considered to be the six ‘Ws’ of journalism: who, what, where, when, why and how. It is amazing how much of the mainstream media does not even attempt this.
- still having trouble knowing what to believe? Here are an additional nine questions that will help you determine what media to trust.
Help Improve the Media
If you would like more information about improving the media or would like to help reform our mainstream news, the following websites will show you where to begin:
All these sources claim that they do not accept government, political, or corporate funding and that their missions are to seek the truth and provide real news versus the entertainment mass media outlets spew to maintain viewer ratings. But this does not and will not ever eliminate all bias. It is up to every reader/listener/watcher to question their news and its sources. Being aware that the mainstream media is mostly propaganda is a good starting point. The difficult part is finding the truth.
This content reflects the personal opinions of the author. It is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and should not be substituted for impartial fact or advice in legal, political, or personal matters.
© 2012 Gemini Fox
Can you recommend any other news sources to add to this list? Please comment!
Tony on June 13, 2020:
RT (Russia Today) is Russian governemnt chanel which is propaganda. Don't trust them, please! They're against the US.
Jason on May 25, 2020:
These are certainly not non partisan sites. I believe in our rights as citizens and do not fall into right, left, Democrat, or Republican. I believe in our rights as Americans and most of these sites are touting the same biased news as the well-known and in our face MSM. Please do your own research and diligence before accepting the information on these sites as “truth”. Independent does not mean hi partisan or factual.
Meg on April 21, 2020:
Great list. Recommend the addition of newtrals.com to the list. Newtrals is great for politically-neutral, independent news.
C on April 02, 2020:
There are sources listed here which are owned by big $$$
Joe on April 01, 2020:
truth on January 03, 2020:
why isnt the young turks on this list?
TJ on April 17, 2019:
BBC is far from being independent, they avoid the real issues of the day and now side with US news sentiments. Sad days indeed...
ormazda on April 13, 2019:
PressTV should be included under foreign news sources.
Evan the Destroyer on April 05, 2019:
TYT Investigates is a source.
hokieguy95 on March 21, 2019:
If you don't have Wikileaks as a source, then you are missing the game changer in our lifetime.
Miebakagh57 on March 12, 2019:
Hello, Gemini, the article is very informative and educational. Thanks for sharing.
Elma Cannon from Chicago Il on February 07, 2019:
In what position can it be cataloged ( Fox News ) Because even the most ignorant can realize how they distort the truth.
Jason on January 29, 2019:
Best news site, your own abilities, all the suggested unbiased news sites are far from that. You are free to do what you want, but for the most part, I am not trusting any media provider anymore.
KDoogle on January 07, 2019:
Thank you Gemini Fox for sharing this VERY important info and resources. I have been searching for reliable, unbiased resources for a long time! Your article is factual: there are no journalistic ethics applied in the mainstream media reports anymore. They've made a mockery of the journalism profession . . . very unfair to those who really value the integrity of their journalism profession.
KeifMalone on December 30, 2018:
I agree 100%. There is an assumption that "A Free Press" means thousands of individuals digging into the affairs of government and business to tell the citizens what they are up to. How many "Journalists" actually do this? Since we know that most of them are not doing this; What the heck are they doing? I like your list of sites that report censorship. Here is a news aggregator site that you might like: http://www.currnews.com/.
ROBIN HOOD on November 15, 2018:
Goes to show, you can not trust anyone in todays world.
Anthony Harness on November 11, 2018:
I googled where to find real news and i got this. Wheres drudge? or infowars? Or even michael savage? its crazy.
AK on October 20, 2018:
I have found that actually spending the time watching Congressional hearings, diabetes, and other real time happenings at least allows me to hear real time what is actually being said. Once the "news" media starts reporting what was said and even allowing you to see snipits of the film what was actually being said has been twisted by only showing the part that the particular news agency wants you to believe.
Kaimick on October 18, 2018:
you know how you determine unbiased news, read it all the left the right the state, and put together all the facts and it makes a good start for what is real
mike morawski on October 13, 2018:
Chris Hedges. An experienced war correspondent and truth teller.
Matt Taibi- Rolling Stone investigative reporter
Bevan on September 25, 2018:
BBC ! Oh dear, someone didn’t research their stuff...........
Harleys on September 20, 2018:
Truthout is clearly a partisan outlet; shouldn't be on anyone's list.
email@example.com on August 24, 2018:
SOTT "Sign of the Times"
Blackcat on August 03, 2018:
Above all, whether news sources are to the left or right, bias or unbias, truthful or false, Gemini Fox has accomplished the sharing of "information" of great importance to us all...not for her to be attacked. Its for all of us to read and take into "consideration" ,to "dialogue", to share more information, to get to the bottom of it. If you didnt agree with what is listed, so be it, that is your right. If you have something to share or add in your comments, then do so...this is what its all about. What ever happened to agreeing to disagree. What ever happened to listening to opinions whether it was right or wrong, saying i hear what you are saying...which in no way means you agree or disagree but that you are just actively listening, allowing someone to have an opinion without bodily harm anymore... thank you Gemini Fox for the article and all who commented it all helps me to think about news sources to consider and research
Code Fore on July 29, 2018:
Believe it or not, RT and Al jazeera are more unbiased than any mainstream links. I use their stuff all the time. It reliable and I have never seen them promote anything biased.
Ken Burgess from Florida on July 27, 2018:
The link below has a video imbedded into it which shows, proves, that the MSM is really one cohesive propaganda machine. https://www.infowars.com/video-news-networks-unifo...
firstname.lastname@example.org on July 25, 2018:
sorry, but are u kidding? Al jazeera and bbc are independent?? they are two state run news agencies, not free at all- its as if i said irans press tv is a free news agency...
al jazeera is financed by wahabis and does not report truthful on anything in the middle east- ever seen whats happening in yemen? or in bahrain? there are 62 million people in need of water, medicine and food, and its being media blacked out by nearly all of thsoe sources you name here...this cannot be free media, sorry
JOHN BAUGHMAN on July 10, 2018:
This problem will never be fixed until students are taught to think critically and are beyond proficient in logic and reasoning. In the current education system, that will never happen.
Susan McNally on May 31, 2018:
AlJezera, but no new sources from Israel? Come on now! I also like to get news from Breaking Israel News (BIN), and the Christian point of view from Israel, Bridges for Peace is one.
Very pleased with Wikileaks. RT has some good info, but can be super biased. Objectivity is rare in this world.
Ch Dkens on May 10, 2018:
Rt. com?! Putin's direct propaganda listed among independent news sources???
Rodney on April 20, 2018:
Thank you Gemini Fox for working to put up this list.
Jeanie Ronaldo on April 19, 2018:
This is a decent list, but honestly visiting these sites regularly to stay up to date is tedious. News Not Heard is pretty great in that regard because I get news from a lot of the sources mentioned above in a nice, summarized newsletter format. Subscribe, I recommend it newnotheard.com
Media Guy on April 13, 2018:
The only thing I disagree with in this article is:
"There was a time when the nightly news was synonymous with the words objective, impartial, fair and balanced. Reporters, newscasters, and their employers, saw it as a duty and badge of honor to inform the public, as factually as possible, of the happenings in this country and around the world."
There was never a time when news was objective. Ever. Never, ever, never, ever. Bias is built in with people. It can be as simple as choosing which story to send a limited amount of resources to cover or as blatant as not covering FDR being in wheelchair.
We are humans and we are biased.
But, the media of the mid to late 20th century certainly strove to appear objective and made a much better effort at doing so than media today.
Still, they left many points-of-view unspoken for, giving the illusion that we our country was farm more homogenous than it really was.
I have this fight with older friends of mine in the media, who can't accept that they were in any way biased because they strove for objectivity, and I applaud their efforts, but it is impossible for humans to do that in something with limited capacity like a news operation. Decisions to ration the resource have to be made on some criteria, and therein is the bias at minimum.
I think we were better served by The Fairness Doctrine than today's media landscape. Under it, if Rachel Maddow or Rush Limbaugh uttered something biased, there would be a legal requirement to have someone with an opposing view voice that opinion in a similar timeslot.
The siloing we have now has created media bubbles that don't even allow the left and right to have a conversation because they can't agree on the facts because of lying, mostly by omission, commentators.
Use the sources they recommend, but make sure to use them as checks on each other. Reason and Democracy Now are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and bring highlight to the stories you wouldn't se on the other, but confirm what you see because they will also frame the stories differently.
Tony wing on April 09, 2018:
‘Wikileaks’, ‘Democracy now!’, and the ‘real news network’ out of Baltimore.And travel more.
Infowars.com,CSPAN on March 11, 2018:
I know Alex Jones doesnt garner a lot of respect.. Je does , tho, attempt to find the truth and often does long before its conaidered fact by the mainstream. He also uses the products and believes in the Companies he allows advertising his news feed. Although he can get over-the-top sometimes, no one can claim he lacks passion.
Richard Ouweneel on February 07, 2018:
Michael @ email@example.com on February 07, 2018:
Education and convenience have lead us down this path, but technology has the potential to correct our downward spiral. Every thing in life as we know it now has a potential to be revolutionized and rediscovered in bold, first person, witnessed experiences that can then be shared and repeated, recorded and archived for all the galaxy to review. We are working toward a reality that all we thought we knew can be questioned. The current mind-boggling situation we are in is being exasperated by those trying to hold on to some power and gobble up as much as they can granted to them by the restrictions on information that the lack of connectivity and un-availability of technology presented. Those days are numbered across the world. The very powerful, in their quest, have produced what consumers demanded only to set the consumers on a path to regain something I like to call a pioneering independence. And although we are not quite there and it may seem worse before it gets better, when the entire human race has access to see first hand how our struggles and pursuits are similar, but our unequalness is because of those in power, a true path to equality will be recognized.
HomeRun on January 30, 2018:
First of all, I want to thank the author for this list. It is still up to us to research these sources and distinguish between the terms "independent" and "biased." This is a list of "independent" news sources, which may or may not be biased.
While I appreciate this list, research shows that some of the "independent" news sources listed are not so "independent." In general, everyone who uses *any* source for news (not just the ones on this list) should check who owns them or has contributed to them. Many are biased or have questionable funding.
Unbiased news sources show all sides of an issue. Yes, it is up to us to find those sources. But we should still question news sources that are owned by either people or corporations that are known to be heavily biased. If a source claims to be "independent," we should all dig further to determine that news source's source of income, then looking even deeper to determine motives of the people behind that source of income.
The other way to approach selecting and consuming news sources is to read various sources -- some with a left bias, some with a neutral bias, and some with a right bias.
Do your own investigation into the individuals and corporations involved (in journalism, this is known as "consider the source") in these various news sites. You can then decide, along with considering the material they present, whether to consider them a reliable news outlet.
My homework was simply to find out who owns some of these sources. That does not mean they will not contain good articles; they very well may have excellent unbiased articles written with both points of view in mind. They may also contain "biased" articles which one can balance by reading opposing views from other news sources.
Some of the homework I did led to the following:
reason.com - Owned by David Koch among others
reuters - traditionally independent, it is now 53% owned by Thomson Reuters
democracy now - suspected funding by George Soros, Carnegie Corporation, Ford Foundation, J.M. Kapland fund
propublica - brainchild of billionaires and major Democratic donors Herbert and Marion Sandler
publicintegrity.org -- Has had controversy and potential ethics issues (research this for yourselves and make your own determination).
Without going into every listed source, the bottom line is, as the author states, we have to do our own research.
With that being said, some of the above sources are not what I would call truly independent, given their hidden or questionable sources of funding. And many are biased. It would be refreshing to find independent *and* unbiased news sources that harkened back to the golden age of journalism when journalists were taught to gather and report all sides of a story -- not their own agenda.
While this list may not be perfect (how can it be, given the age of news and journalism in which we live?), I am thankful for it nonetheless as it gives us a starting point for learning to think for ourselves.
Linda Rubin on January 25, 2018:
I believed u until u left out PBS News.
B.M. Shatforth on December 20, 2017:
all you have to do is look at the list of so called "unbiased" news outlets, visit a few of them and say to yourself..."my lord...is that what they call "unbiased"?
Jack Rekshasa on December 07, 2017:
It's sad that this sort of thing brings out the troll in people. It's a good article and a starting point. None of these are perfect but they are good enough to help you understand what is actually happening and that's great in this day and age.
The constant nagging from the insecure conservatives about the liberal bias of everything that's not smeared with conservative red, is just more of the same. Most of these complainers aren't conservatives anyway, they exist to oppose liberal or reasonable view points and are stuck in some kind of instinctive oppositional cycle fueled by their anti-liberal dopamine agonists.
Unfortunately for them, reality does have a liberal bias... think about it.
Jeanette Herrera on November 08, 2017:
I read a reporter/journalist, named Ryan Grim. He recently left his online paper to start his own. I believe him to be truthful, fair and balanced. He is interesting and also has a slight flair of making you smile when appropriate. He has links on all his articles. The ones I have read are ones that take me to the Interecpt, who he also writes for, as well as another person who I believe to be an impeccable person of great talent and honesty, Jeremy Scahill. I have read and enjoyed his books considering the topics.
I believe both of these gentlemen should be on your list for Independent Reporters. Thank you
Kevin on October 12, 2017:
Many of these are political opinion sites. I wanted sites that provide facts and facts only. It's too easy to go through these lists and find sites that confirm our individual biases.
I'm glad to have a list of sites to sift through, but it it is irresponsible to promote some of these third rate news organizations.
Richard Ostergadr on August 29, 2017:
Isn't it interesting that Drudge Report is not even mentioned?
Dina Barzilai on August 26, 2017:
I appreciate the intent of this article and agree with checking sources, getting news from independent sources etc.
However, although I won't comment on some of your less-biased sources listed--I have to comment on Al Jazeera. You did not do your homework.
Not only do they accept government funding, they are basically OWNED by the Qatari government/Royal family. They are extremely biased on many issues--I could go on but everyone can research it themselves. The Royal arm of the Qatari government is NOT imdependent, nor objective and relatively unbiased.
Ryan from Louisiana, USA on July 24, 2017:
So many great views in this article. It is crazy how the media can be so manipulative, especially to these younger generations who want to quickly believe what they hear. Great work on this article.
Angel Guzman from Joliet, Illinois on July 24, 2017:
An independent press is priceless and important to democracy! Great read.
Sherri Grotts on June 24, 2017:
Gemini Fox, I happened upon this article when I googled unbiased news websites. This article you wrote is really good, and I'm going to share this on my Facebook. I wrote a few of the websites down, and I'm going to give them a try!
bob79 on June 11, 2017:
Funny how the real news that comes out here is not listed and the person writing this does not list real news here besides their ones they think are true! not saying some are true news but there are others that report 98% cent true with others being mocked that manyv cal conspitacy and that is what comes true! I feel this report is only partially true as some are part of the giant news corporations.
Marbunster@AOL.COM on May 21, 2017:
I FIND THE MEDIA REPULSIVE.BIASED,CORRUPTED,SICKENING AND DISHEARTENING.
Also I find Cnn un- American and almost traitorists. They spew their lies worldwide and turn others against America.
The BBC is on the same level. It is my home country and I am sad to find them so unethical.
Truth and reliable sources are no longer needed in Journalism. Anything poisonous against Trump with no sources will be covered as fact.
Amanda on April 06, 2017:
Thanks so much for this list! I found it quite useful as an international relations student. Most mainstream media harps on about the same topics and I was looking for more variety and different perspectives. I especially love newsbud and the intercept. I even bookmarked some of those new sites, including this page. :)
Larry on April 04, 2017:
Just visited 5 of the 10 links provided. ALL 5 do nothing more than promote democrat ideals and trash conservative ones.
This article promotes only the left.
I sure would like to find a new source that is balanced.
EdwardLane on March 08, 2017:
Excellent and significant article about maybe the most important issue in America today.
Oliver McCann on March 05, 2017:
The BBC ought not be cited as a reliable source because it is partly Government funded. Furthermore its coverage of Middle East affairs is far from unbiased. However I write from an Irish/European perspective which appears quite different from the American experience. The Washington Post and the NYT are my preferences.
Ken Burgess from Florida on February 26, 2017:
Today's free speech news sources are you and I... the internet, and all that is on it... Hubpages, YouTube, the ability to Email others and get answers directly from the source.
MSM is little more than propaganda, corporate, or political, repeaters as you say, not reporters. Today's newspapers and news channels are dinosaurs, they are already extinct they just don't know it yet.
Tina on February 25, 2017:
This is fantastic, thank you for sharing!
Tom Richardson on February 23, 2017:
Having been part of a JOA ( joint operating agreement) in Detroit, Michigan, I can say for sure that it was a con job perpetrated by Ronald Reagan and Edwin Meese. The figures involved ( ABCs....audit bureau of circulation) were phone figures and had been for years. Now, as in most large cities, there is one newspaper in Detroit.....oh sure, two coin op machines, side by side, but in reality, it is one newspaper.
Truth B. Told on February 22, 2017:
These are very refreshing choices if you want the same crap your already being fed being served to you in a trojan horse.
Larry on February 17, 2017:
This is my first encounter with this site and am already loving it. Hope I can get by more often from now
Hello on February 15, 2017:
cha on February 05, 2017:
This looked like a good site for me to find a recommended news site that isn't biased. Wrong! It took about 3-5 min. each on the 10 independent sites listed to see that they ALL are slanted in 1 direction or another. "Independent" obviously does not mean un-biased. Sad.
Gingee on February 01, 2017:
Thank you for the information! I did not feel any bias.
Thank you, thank you, thank you!!! on January 31, 2017:
This is one of most needed articles I've read recently. Thank you Gemini Fox for your research, accuracy and unbiased approach in explaining what is really going on with journalism today. This is a message that nobody will hear in mass media...yet it needs to be heard and understood in spades. I shared it with all my FB friends.
rsholl on January 28, 2017:
www.neutralnews.co.uk is an excellent comparative media source - one to watch
NFS247 on January 25, 2017:
This is the best thing I have read in a long time - very important and truthful info here. THANK YOU! I will be sharing this :)
Bob on January 23, 2017:
Truth-out.org needs removed from the 'non-partisan' list. They are far from non-partisan.
Gemini Fox (author) on January 22, 2017:
Many thanks to all who have alerted me to needed corrections.
Many thanks, also, to those of you who stepped up to the plate and offered additional sources. If they have not been incorporated into the list it’s because they openly stated they favored either the left or the right (the documentary “The Brainwashing of My Dad”) or were ‘for-profit’ or family owned (One America News Network). The sources here were specifically chosen because their websites state that they are non-profit and/or independent from their financial support. Some even outline their code of ethics (which may or may not mean much); some are transparent with their funding. This does not eliminate bias but hopefully does allow a source more freedom to disperse the real facts – and address subjects the MSM won’t even touch, something that is desperately needed.
To those who have commented that one source or another is biased:
1. Please read my Author’s Note. Then reread it. And then reread it as many times as it takes for the meaning to sink in . . .
2. I find it infinitely amusing that those who scream about sources being biased can never seem to come up with one they consider to be unbiased. Please return with a source. I assure you I will find someone in less than 5 who says that, in their opinion, it’s biased. If this is hard for you to comprehend, reread #1.
3. Why exactly did you assume a source is biased? Because it doesn’t align with what you believe? Did you bother to research the facts? What if what you’re reading is actually the facts and it is you who is biased? Perhaps it is that you are part of the much too large portion of the populace who simply will not acknowledge facts that do not align with their preconceived notions. No way for me to help you with your detachment from reality.
4. If you have an open mind and understand the meaning of critical thought, you will give a source a chance. Did you read just one article (or simply a headline) and make your decision the source was biased? Maybe you read the writings of the one person in the organization (out of perhaps many) who wrote on that particular topic with what you consider to be a biased slant, but that doesn’t mean the entire source is biased.
5. Perhaps most importantly: reading many sources of news, whether you consider them biased or not, is sometimes the only way to find a glimmer of the truth. No one source is going to spoon-feed you reality. I’ve always considered Fox News to be the lowest denominator when it comes to journalism, if it can even be called that. But during the 2016 election, they were one of the first to call Hillary on her corruption, later corroborated by Wikileaks – while CNN and the Washington Post derided Bernie and defended her until it was impossible to do so without looking idiotic. This also applies to foreign news sources. Yes, they may be biased - or they may be a factual look at American issues the media in this country refuse to address - or purposely black out. Sometimes if you know a news source has an agenda, use it. It’s in their best interest to dig for dirt on that topic – as in apply real journalism.
Finally, I would like to point out that I have no ‘skin in the game’ here. This isn’t about playing favorites. I’m not being paid in any way by any of these sources. It is very, very hard to find out what is actually happening in our world today and the powers-that-be certainly want to keep it that way. Journalists were once (a long time ago) the front line for keeping the establishment’s corruption somewhat at bay – now, when they’re not actually in the establishment’s pocket, they’re being jailed for outing the truth. THINK about that. And then think about how the MSM covered the 2016 election, how the MSM literally helped Trump win the election, how Trump is now threatening the MSM if they don’t pander to him and perhaps, worst of all, how most of the MSM is kowtowing to his tantrums in fear he may otherwise not allow them access. This should be scaring the crap out every American who believes in democracy . . . not that we have one any longer. The catastrophe of the Iraq war and now the election of someone who could potentially morph into a dictator, both occurring because our media is so utterly corrupt it no longer bothers to do its job, should make the monumental importance of real journalism’s role in a truly free society crystal clear to all those who aren’t in a coma.
Thank you for reading and please don’t stop your search.
Gale on January 22, 2017:
I am constantly looking for alternatives to the mainstream media and this article provides a great deal of information in that direction. I am so disappointed in both the left and right controlling the public with the media. I just want the truth so I can make an informed decision. But one statement I continue to make to my friends is to stop talking and start acting, get involved with both writing your representatives and actions. The final statement in this article is pure truth and everyone should take to heart.
DesertRat on January 22, 2017:
We all need to be what Ben Franklin envisioned, and for a time realized - citizen journalists, publishing papers on every corner.
alwm on January 11, 2017:
The article I liked and found informative. However, Freepress( which is listed as 1 of the 2 websites at the bottom as to how to improve the media and where to start) Appeared to me at nothing more that a TMZ of politics- Which is the very reason I came to your website . I feel frustrated and helpless that so many people are; and Ill go as far as to say- subliminally molded into being and thinking what the media/ government/ whoever wants us to believe- So when I open link to FreePress and all i see is "Jeff Sessions is a racist!" , i can hardly rely on them to be credible , correct, and very least , unbiased. Which completely undermines your article- which was a breath of fresh air until that link- just wanted you to know. I feel that many people will be seeking information as to what they can do to try to show media we NEED truth, not their version of it. And that website reinforced what we already knew
Kanik on December 26, 2016:
Try Adractive app. provides news with different views to keep it unbiased. also provides a short history / background
haba baba on December 22, 2016:
I agree to some degree, makes sense
wasntme on December 21, 2016:
You must be kidding. al jezeera and the bbc?
Howard Stapleton on December 13, 2016:
What America truly needs: teaching and learning critical thinking and reasoning at a younger age and continuing that education throughout college/university level. Since every human has and demonstrates bias, the best way I've found to have a better likelihood at arriving at what's mostly accurate and true is to get one's news from a variety of news sources - domestic, foreign, left, right, center, and to use critical thinking to question all that is gleaned and processed. It's an arduous task at first, but becomes easier once a plan is put into place and practiced. ie. Using an RSS reader or new aggregator site allows you to select various sources and read them all in one location.
Studies have revealed these base positions in major media:
Betty on December 13, 2016:
RT and Sputnik...you must be kidding me!
Karen on December 11, 2016:
I think most of these sources have a leftist bent. Perhaps they were different 4 years ago. But now I find it difficult to find an outlet for the news, not a reporter's opinion.
H----S on December 10, 2016:
I don't think the author said these were neutral - just independent and generally trustworthy ... though RT and Sputnik definitely don't fit that description!
It's a good start and it would be nice of all the folks yelling "that's biased!" would suggest their alternatives for findng non-fake news, when possible from independent sources.
As Americans we get our in-country news mostly from one of the big 6 - so anything truthful from another source is a good option for us to consider in our news pile. I want to know what RT is saying, but I want to know that it's propaganda, just like other state-owned news sources. Knowing what they ar saying is different from believing everything they say. So VOA, UK and German sources, etc - valuable if you have the right goggles on!
Adrienne on December 08, 2016:
The Young Turks
Carol Ramirez on December 07, 2016:
I do not see Alternet.org on your list. It was my understanding that they were a good source of real news. No?
Genealogy Nut on December 05, 2016:
Genealogy with out documentation is called Mythology! All of the major news media sources are giving us Mythology every day. Please boycott these dishonest organizations. It is all about money for them. They don't care about us! They will not change, until we force them by not listening to them any more! I am saying goodbye to all major news companies.
Jim on December 02, 2016:
I can get more factual information from my local High School newspaper then the so called professional media.
Caitiesnanny on December 02, 2016:
It would be a cold day in hell when I go to Al Jazeera for any news.
dbmarsh on December 02, 2016:
Thanks for the information. I'm just starting to look into better ways to get my news. Truthfully I have avoided all news for many years due to various grievances with the way it is presented. Hopefully I will be refreshed by some of the alternatives. Again, thanks!
j. fay on November 25, 2016:
CNN, NBC, ABC, FOX and MSNBC have just given up their rights to free speech. They've allowed trump to tell them all to shut up. None of them have broken their non disclosure agreements and none of them walked out of them, like a real reporter would do. I'm looking for trust worthy outlets hoping to see these cowards replaced as sources.
notlurking on November 24, 2016:
The new sources are labeled independent by the author........that has my radar blinking red......independent my ass......just look at who the big ones endorsed in this bizarre election.......HRC....now tell me how independent is that.......lol.....
HB on November 23, 2016:
Sorry, but none of these sites are unbiased . Scanned through them all and found them to be mostly left leaning with liberal/left opinion pieces. These sites are no better then right leaning ones. Very difficult to find a balanced news source out there that shares facts and allows the readers to decide for themselves.
Bob in NJ on November 22, 2016:
Not sure why Gemini Fox has allowed this to carry on so long without remaining an active participant in the discussion. But while I won't attempt to speak on her behalf, I WILL say that the basis for this post remains relevant.
The most important thing that EVERYONE needs to realize first & foremost is that MOST media sources now have some bias or viewpoint. It's the end-product of the "24-hour news cycle" and the consolidation of our media. It's now more about ratings... and filling air time... and even sensationalism, than it is about pure reporting. Running down leads, double- and triple-checking facts & sources BEFORE commenting, and real investigative reporting takes time; and while the payoff can be sensational, the process is more likely to be "boring" and time-consuming (read: not "good TV").
It is incumbent upon us, as American citizens, to do our own due diligence. Yes, the list that was originally compiled--and since added to--here is flawed. But that's the challenge. We need to be willing to put in the work- to research, read and evaluate information from MULTIPLE sources and viewpoints, to try to read between the lines & find Truth. We've gotten lazy, folks- we want our snippets & soundbytes so we can feel "informed" in a hurry, and move on to our reality TV and NetFlix while still feeling good about ourselves.
So stop debating the individual links here. Just use them as a starting point, come to your own conclusions about them, and if they don't strike you as "unbiased", then dig around and find some yourselves! Then you can post your OWN list in your OWN blog for others to use as a new benchmark. :-)
George on November 19, 2016:
@Steven: I wonder about that "liberal bias" thing. At the moment you live in a mostly liberal environment (like, half of the US, or whole Austria) it's obviously almost impossible to be absolutely non-biased, since you would need to deny the content of most news you actually read, even if their argumentation seems logical and is backed by trustworthy sources. Of course journalists, which live in liberal environments, will statistically get more into contact with other people which share liberal values at least to a certain extent.
This is no actively made "bias" which alters the quality of the media in any way. Instead of banishing news outlets like reuters, you could just add an explicitely illiberal news outlet into your mix. Of course you need to think about every text you read, if it's written to convince you of illiberal or liberal values, or not.
There is a huge difference between the 'bias" of reuters and, say, the "bias" of sputnik. Sputnik (and RT) are websites controlled by the russian government, and an active part of their communication strategy. These news outlets put a further meaning into every news they publish. These news are really biased towards pre-defined (russian governmental) values.
Because of that, I cant understand why RT and Sputnik are part of that list.
Of course you could argue, that every govt-led website is somehow "biased". If not, why are there only UK and Russian govt news outlets listed? What about France24 or DW (Deutsche Welle, German website)?
Many (democratic) countries have govt-controlled news outlets which are known for their journalistic quality being on par with better news sites and NGO news projects. No reason to stay away from them if you would even read something like RT.
Steven on November 19, 2016:
1. The Real News Network (therealnews.com) Severe Liberal Bias
2. The Christian Science Monitor (csmonitor.com) Slight Conservative Bias
3. Truthout (truth-out.org) Severe Liberal Bias
4. Reuters (reuters.com) Slight Liberal Bias
5. The Nation (thenation.com) Severe Liberal Bias
6. ProPublica (propublica.org) Mostly Conspiracy Related Content.
7. The Center for Public Integrity (publicintegrity.org) Appears to be Unbias
8. Reveal (The Center for Investigative Reporting) (revealnews.org)Appears Unbias but also appears to have some conspiracy related content.
9. AllSides (allsides.com) Appears to be Unbias but contains news sources from Mainstream media like New York Times and CNN who have been know to post fake news and have Severe Bias.
10. FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) (fair.org) Severe Liberal Bias and Post Fake News
11. Who, What, Why (whowhatwhy.org) Severe Liberal Bias
12. WorldNews (WN) Network (wn.com) Slight Liberal Bias and Foreign News Source
13. Sputnik (sputniknews.com) Government Bias, Foreign(Russia) and Conspiracy.
14. Watchdog.org Appears Unbias but appears to take a hands off approach political sensitive topics.
Tiff on November 18, 2016:
Listen up, I've seen a ton of comments stating this is bias and this isnt. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's bias or non-bias. There are some legitimate, all sided news sources out there. But just because you may not agree with it, doesn't technically mean it's bias.
Stéphane on November 18, 2016:
Sputnik and RT as non partisant ? Are you serious ? These are propaganda arms of Russia !
Teacher MARK on November 16, 2016:
British: BBC News (bbc.com)
British: The Guardian (guardian.co.uk/)
That's hilarious... They are proud left wing liberal news outlets.
Nobody in the world would seriously take the view that these places are neutral or independent.
Did Lena Dunham compile this list! Ha ha!
Derek Tang on November 16, 2016:
RT and Sputnik are owned by the Russian government. Sputnik was the source of the fake Wikileaks document that Trump used during the campaign - the first major sign that Russia was attempting to tamper with the election. There is no way either of those can be credibly included on this list.
Also, The Nation and Truthout identify themselves as providing progressive op-eds. Likewise, CSMonitor does lean right.
This is all a good start, though.
NeedNews on November 14, 2016:
Sorry, but therealnews.com is liberal. Go look at it.
RealityAndUnderstanding on November 14, 2016:
After months and months of watching all those chuckle heads on mainstream news each night and following those grossly onaccurate polls, I feel like I've been watching some sort of reality show where the American electorate is the punchline. I was not one of those people who thought Hilary had it in the bag but it wasn't even close. I no longer watch high-paid, out of touch anchors -- why waste my time. I want to know what my fellow American thinks and deals without the filter of the no-nothing news. The list here has offered some good options to try out for additional perspective. I'm also working on keeping an open mind when it comes to the opinion and character of others.
QuestForTruth on November 13, 2016:
I'm 26 years old and I'm sad to confess a few truths. Over the last few days, following the announcement of the Presidential Elect, I had become depressed and unmotivated. I'm always on the go as a senior in college, so Facebook and CNN are ways that I can quickly stay updated on what's going on in our country and sometimes around the world. Sad, I know. There was an overwhelming amount of news released and I didn't know WHAT to believe. After noticing my change in mood, I decided to cleanse my home (smudging and meditating) and told myself that I'm going to disconnect from social media for the weekend (hopefully I'll last longer.) Well, it's been 2 days and I feel unbelieveably good. I've found my motivation again and I'm not harboring the feelings of those that are being attacked based on their perceived ethnicity and who they support politically. It's so weird how amazing social media can be but it's also saddening how much damage it has the power to cause. I'm grateful for this article. I had no idea of the Big Six or the FCC (mind blowing.) I've gone and subscribed to ALL of the ethical news sources you posted. Thanks again.
DB on November 12, 2016:
All news is corrupt and biased now.
rho on November 10, 2016:
These might have been unbiased news 4 years ago, but no longer.
notlurking on October 26, 2016:
I agree with others that many of the sites are strongly biased......but not left or right....many are biased to corporatism and neoliberalism.....does not matter if you are democrat or republican both are beholden to corporations......both are one side of the same coin......and btw has anybody noticed Ms Fox has not blogged in some time........mmmm
Beechnut on October 19, 2016:
I saw reuters and stopped reading. Nuff said