Huffington Post (jk)

BBC is usually pretty solid tbh. They might have bias in British politics, but it's very rare for them to have bias for foreign politics.

I enjoy the Economist. They have more commentary/opinion than straight news, but still overall pretty good.

Not sure exactly what you mean by technical news, but assuming you mean science/technology, the following are good:

Scientific American
IEEE Spectrum
Ars Technica
MIT Technology Review

Telesur, ItarTass, sputnik, Carib Flame, presstv, maan news, politika, Xinhua, scmp, deutschwelle

Wsj and Bloomberg aren't awful as far as us news goes. I don't trust any British media.

Breitbart

Doesn't quite fit the "objective" criteria, leon.

Reuters

objectivity is subjective

If a human is involved there is going to be bias, so it's not as much trying to find unbiased as getting info from as many sides as possible.

You can go that route, or you can just read what you want to read and moderate it depending on what you know the implicit biases from those sources already are.

Though, of course, that means that you have to have self restraint and be able to think for yourself, which a stupidly high amount of people are incapable of doing.

Breitbart is objective? Boy, you played yourself.

This is not a shot at you, bo, but I've heard the second point you made about 57,294 times in the 28 years I've been following politics. Besides making the person who trots it out feel good about themselves, it's a completely vapid statement.

I've heard it plenty of times but that doesn't make it moot. The point is to accept that people, myself included, are more than likely going to read a source that they know fits their viewpoints instead of something potentially conflicting. Even so, part of reading news media is understanding that there may be misleading statements or overdramatized headlines, plus there is probably some form of exagerrated reporting in order to meet the demands of the source's captive audience. They have to, that's how their business works. You can read whatever you want and have an eye for little things that, after three seconds of thought, you realize are probably inherently biased or misleading.

Not reading from a single source. You get man different biases and make your own (biased) mind up.

Also, i had a big rant about how BBC is biased as all shit, taking Syria as my example, when the UK was discussing bombing the country near the start of the civil war they had all these sympathetic stories about the Syrian refugees, now that they are negotiating with Turkey to prevent Syrians entering the EU it is 'migrants'.

Context here: it is illegal under international law to bomb a sovereign state without tue invitation of their government (thus the UK can bomb Iraqi Sunnis if the Shia lead government invites them to...) It is also a legal obligation to accept refugees fleeing presecution in their own country.

Now the context of international law depends on when it was written - in 1945/46 europe had a huge refugee crisis and allowing people some freedom of movement made sense. In 2016 an influx of Syrian refugees is seen as a threat to/by some and thus they become 'migrants' - but BBC was reporting them as refugees back in 2013 when Assad was bombing them and the government was considering bombing Assad - back then very few Syrian refugees were entering Europe, so they were not precieved as a threat.

Still BBC seems completely biased in favour of UK government policy. Shockingly un-independent.

In conclusion, i'd say read the BBC if you want to learn about US policy, they have more room to be unbiased and critical, but not if you want to know about what the UK is doing wrong.

I only get my news from Rush Limbaugh. I listen to him religiously and whatever he says; I know the opposite is true.

Your misuse of semicolons makes me distrust everything you say.

yeah, your misuse of semicolons is horrible; stop it.

Let's; ruin; this; joke; before; it; gets; out; of; hand;.

I don;t get it.

I just got a ;oscopy

i think; brainbomb has actually done something right here.

BBC is notorious for posting fake and or miscaptioned photos and was one of main cheerleaders for the Iraq War.

"Not reading from a single source. You get man different biases and make your own (biased) mind up." - Ora

Exactly.

i get all my news from webdip.

So you are a Bernie Sanders supporter then?

#feelthebern #electthejew

I recently signed up for USNI which is helpful for the military and maritime angle.

Is there some reason you're so interested in military developments?

Well I'm in the military... So... Yeah...

Oh, cool. I never knew that.

Jane's is a good military news resource. Many news sources do regular features on military tech news just not American ones.

Thanks for the tip, looks like an interesting source.