"Greneral Questions" information sources. Which do you trust?

[the_first_supraliminal]

UPI and AP wire service bylines are always reliable.
Found in most papers’ sites.

I usually trust anything with .edu or .org in the url

[The_Ryan]

*Originally posted by notquitekarpov *. The BBC are a public corporation but nothing to do with the government.

So if you have a TV and don’t pay the fee, what happens? Does the BBC send someone over? I should point out that the police are most definitely included in the American definition of “government”.

And The Ryan in relation to my comparison to being legally required to buy motor liability insurance here in the UK if you want to drive - but it is a free market in that you can buy from whomever you like. You just have to have it from somewhere. In **no/b] sense are any of them government companies and all are impartial in respect to the government.

That’s my point: IF you were required to patronize a particular insurance copany, THEN it would not be independent. No company which has a government enforced monopoly is truly independent.

[notquitekarpov]

OK thanks jklann and The Ryan we’re getting there…

If you don’t pay your TV license you get pursued by the BBC in pretty much the same way as if you owed me money and didn’t pay. You cannot get arrested, but you could get fined or jailed I guess ultimately, but I have those santions against debtors too as well as the BBC and I do not become part of the government by using it.

As all governments I can recall bitterly complain the BBC are biased against them I conclude it passes the test, as well as any organisation can, of being independent. From what you say I agree there appears more consensus between Labour/Liberals/Conservatives in the UK about the role of government than perhaps in the USA. But perhaps only because we don’t really have a truely left wing major party any more…

And The Ryan if that was your point and as your “IF…” statement is invalid I guess we now agree. There is no monopoly or requirement to use a particular insurer - only that you carry insurance which has many sellers operating in a cut-throat competitive market.

[Airman_Doors_USAF]

*Originally posted by ruadh *
**Once again, may I recommend Liz Curtis’s Ireland the Propaganda War, to show how “impartial” the BBC really is on matters in which it agrees with the Government. **

That’s an interesting statement.

So what we have is a situation where everyone demands “cites”, and yet nobody can agree on a source that is impartial, so what happens is the cites can be dismissed as biased by anybody who disagrees with them. Talk about rigorous. :rolleyes:

As a corollary to the OP, why do people demand cites for everything? Isn’t that just voluteering someone else’s opinion to support your own? I’ve often wondered why, when someone presents an opinion they have to back it up with other opinions. When you really think about it, it’s silly. You need a credible cite, but what is that? An opinion from a PhD? A public opinion poll? A standard news story? The Op/Ed page of the New Republic? Mother Jones? What?

Sometimes I think it would be better if we could just present an opinion without having to rally up other opinions that can be summarily dismissed anyway.