Journalists are about as honest as politicians.
Journalists are about as honest as politicians.
If you expect people to be rational, you aren't being rational.
I voted Other, and here is my explanation for that view -- the media is beholden to the government and the government is beholden to them and has penetrated their ranks. That is true. What also is true is that some of the organizations are horrifically partisan. Their bias is not logical. But it is their job to be biased, so they enjoy the checks as they're cashin' 'em. Print media suffers from a lot of the same drawbacks that the mainstream TV news does. They get pressed on by the government, are beholden to them for information, have been penetrated by the Security Services and rely on sensationalist headlines to draw people to read their paper, be it an actual paper or their digitized content, because they are also beholden to investors and an owner and etc etc because they're a business. They have to be to broadcast the news of the day.
There are more flaws, but here's why I chose Other -- the media will crucify the government from time-to-time. If you ever have the inclination, peruse newspaper archives. The media has beaten the government over the head with so many, many different things over the years. It is a natural conflict written into the U.S. Constitution. The Founding Fathers knew that an aware and educated populace would keep the ship running steadily ahead. Obviously, 200+ years later, there's 316,000,000+ of us now inhabiting this land. An aware and educated populace today would put an end to the exploits the government today and all of 'em before have thoroughly enjoyed. The media tries to inform us, but people nowadays are just not interested in knowing what's going on in the world outside of their friends and family. They'd rather watch the NFL and drink a cold beer any day of the week instead of scrolling through Google News. Such is life.
I'll just focus on their written formats, the televisions formats can be far more problematic as they work with a 24/7 model that pushes them to just fill in time with second-rate journalism on some horrible thing that happened.
Mainstream Media is bias when it wants to be, reliable when it wants to be, and trustworthy until they have a reason not to be. Most of the stuff MM sources put out on a daily basis are more less accurate unless it's like the RT or some popular ultra right-wing/left-wing site -- Fox can be pretty bad, but it's not RT bad, that's just a Russian propaganda site. CNN, BBC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, CNBC, Wall Street Journal, and other such major sources can range from decent to great.
Non-mainstream sites are hardly superior in quality if you're just using popularity of use to divide the two. Al Jazeera is great for a lot of things, but you won't see them paying enough time to that backwards, slave driving petrostate they call home, ya know, Qatar. NPR and PBS are great, no doubt.
I guess the teller in quality is how they handle the more sensitive and high profile of stories and how much attention they past to major affairs outside the sphere of the developed world and developing world power player.
Non-mainstream sources are far more likely to fall towards fringe sentiments and spew unfounded nonsense, so you need to be more careful with that on a normal basis as opposed to mainstream sources bending the facts to support their narrative, or their owner's narrative, that is. Though, they can also be great and call attention to less....followed situations and stories around the country or the world if it's global in scope.
Anyway, all sources are bias by default, that's just how it is. Reliable? For the mainstream, usually, though this can vary when the big stories come around. Trustworthy? It varies, they were pretty atrocious with the Ferguson mess and even worse with the Ebola business (though they never gave false information, they stirred up false fears).
All I can say is get your news from multiple sources, several at the least and not all of the same national origin or general political sway ( if it caters heavily to liberal or conservative views, you need to diversify a bit).
Oh, and yea, pay attention.
I mean it was hilarious how many people were surprised by the NSA revelations by Snowden when articles had been out by all the major news sites in this nation about companies handing over client info to the government and general, unlawful surveillance of the American people a few years before.
"I am not among those who fear the people. They and not the rich, are our dependence for continued freedom." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1816 "[F]acts are before ideas." -- Mikhail Bakunin, 1882
Also, I like how you just gloss over the fact that Egypt for a time wasn't ruled by an ally of the US. So I assume you admit then that Egypt wasn't carried out by CIA moles?
I'm convinced Dave Fagan has dreams where oil companies in human form beat him to death with sacks full of fiat dollars and then rob him of his gold.
And besides, that's not the reason we bombed Libya. Hell, if it were up to the US, we wouldn't of been involved in the first place. But the real reason for us having to do it, was that there was a large influx of refugees coming from your model nation, and the Euros had to do something about it. Of course, the Euros couldn't even handle this situation on their own, thus is why we were dragged in.