No. of Recommendations: 2
I mean, you don't have to do that. But it might be helpful if you're aware of the fact that a particular news source is, in fact, marketing itself to an ideologically homogeneous audience before trying to cite it to people who do try to distinguish between ideological "news" sources and those that fulfill traditional news functions.
----------------
One thing I put a lot of stock in is actual video of the news item being reported. From that, I can make my own assessment regardless of what the particular news caster is saying about it or what network is doing the reporting. Now he may be confirming what my own eyes are telling me and even he is from news source that some say is biased, there still is the video to back up their words.
This can't work with subjective reporting like "Trump is a Russian asset".
But when reporting about border chaos, for example, is accompanied with day after day after day of video of massive groups of immigrants, tent cities, trash heaps lining the banks of Rio Grande, continuous swarms crossing the river, interviews with border county sheriffs, border city mayors, ranchers whose fences have been cut and outbuildings broken in to, etc, etc etc, I can believe it when even the biggest liar on Fox News, Tucker Carlson, is reporting it.
