I've written a lot in the past of understanding what your writer's rationale is for reporting news or writing posts. I always think it is important to have their frame of reference in mind because it explains a lot of what they are reporting and how they are reporting it.
First question you should always ask yourself is why are they making news? Is it to make money for their corporate masters or for some other purpose? I really believe no matter what your political leanings are - ALL OF YOUR NEWS IS SLANTED even if it is just slanted to make more money. If you don't understand that you are living in the 1950s. Take this small but humorous example from this morning's Sports Page on The Newark Star Ledger.
Back at the end of June, Dan Graziano wrote an article that said the Yankees were finished and wouldn't make the playoffs. It really pissed me off for the reason that it was way too early to write my Yankees off. That article so upset me that I basically started to ignore his ramblings, but I did believe he was entitled to his own opinion. That is until he wrote his poor explanation for it in the article called Eating My Words. See below as today's exhibit as to why News "reporters" should NOT be trusted anymore to report clean stories and all they care about is making money for their Corporation:
"So when former deputy business editor Kevin Shinkle (who's still getting used to this whole sports thing) had come to me a couple of days earlier suggesting we do a column saying, "It's Over. What's Next?" I'd protested only briefly. I wrote them off in 2005, I said, and I swore I'd never do it again. But Shinkle said it would be fun, and I agreed. This is sports, after all, and it's supposed to be fun. Besides, they were done. No way were they coming back. Not this time. Not from this."
"we got cute. Dredged up a year-old trade deadline quote from Brian Cashman about how he'd always wondered what it would be like to be a seller at the deadline, and wrote, "Well, Brian, now's your chance." Went through the whole roster, basically, and took a look at what the Yankees could get for their various players if they decided to deal them and build for the future. Splashed it on the front page of the sports section under a brilliant, over-the-top Mike Scott cartoon of a guy in a Yankees uniform lying face-down on the ground, holding a white flag, with a giant fork sticking out of his back. It was fun."
Look at the words he used. We got cute, it was fun, dredged up a year-old quote. Does that sound like unbiased reporting to you? It was all about selling newspapers that's it (period). To me it doesn't even look like it was based on his real opinion (I said, and I swore I'd never do it again. But Shinkle said it would be fun, and I agreed).
To me this is a great example of why you need multiple sources of information. You need to form your own opinion by getting as much information you can on a subject that matters to you. Think about how many more headlines and stories you have read that were just written to have some fun with you or just written to get you to buy a paper or tune into a TV show. Do yourself a favor and be an informed reader. Otherwise, you'll just end up a $1 poorer and less informed than you were before you read some news.