BBC good news: Americans embrace politics online

[Jim Warren]

Well, sorta of a *Duh* for most DUers, however the content has to be an overall positive.....and the photo of bush/cheney they thought to accompany the article is priceless.....they look less than comfortable with the news.

Increasingly Americans are turning to international online news sources to get a perspective on how domestic political life is played out on the wider stage.

more@http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6272431.stm

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. duh! who wooda thunk it?

the more they talk about blitzed blonde bimbos, OJ, or who won Murican Idle, the more that Americans will search out real news sources. unfortunately, the producers of this crap just don't get it. Or perhaps, when they left the sports of entertainment wing, they never learned what news was all about.
news is NOT a packaged, ratings-weighted, effort to sell ads.
news is news. data, understanding, insight, and history, all rolled into one.

No one person can be expert about the entire globe, much less, a large city like NY or Chicago. But, the sense of what is important, and having the ability to provide the facts in an informed, enlightened and curious way, well, that is what news is supposed to be.

Even now, PBS' news hour comes close, but not close enough. KO, when he is permitted to do REAL NEWS, is great. But, it is a sad statement that the Daily Show and Colbert come closer to educating, advising, and informing than any other cable MSM outlet.

[magellan]

2. BushCo should be worried

You can't trust the US corporate media half as much for an unbiased, factual report as you can international sources, like those in the UK and EU. Foreign media also tends to cover the big picture: not just how something affects the US, but how it affects the world. That perspective is needed so badly in this country, to get us out of this deadly "me first" mentality. I'm glad to hear Americans are availing themselves of the resources.

[applegrove]

3. It competes with MSM so they have to be more honest in their reporting

or will loose more viewers IMHO. MSM has started to report real stories again. Not all the time, but more than in the years that followed 9/11. Good news indeed.

[Broadslidin]

4. In June'06, The B.B.C. reported, 163 Million Web Visitors a Week.....!!

And I am one of them.

The variety and quality of the programming is 1st Class...

And hundreds of commercial free programs are available
instantly - Truly, a Radio Listener's Paradise!

[monmouth]

5. I get the "Daily Mail" everyday in my inbox. Love it.

[Peace Patriot]

6. The BBC is okay and has the advantage of multilingual staff all over the

world--a residual benefit of the Empire. But they too are under constraints, had a knockdown dragout with the Blairites over BBC reporting on the "sexed up" prewar WMD intel on Iraq, and have suffered staff cutbacks and other punishments for their attempts to be objective. I'd say they've been bruised, damaged. But, still, they do present a grand sweep of things going on in the world, with significant depth, like no other news service.

They're far, FAR better than AP--and certainly better than anything else we have here. NPR just sucks, and the war profiteering corporate news monopolies deserve to have their corporate charters pulled and their assets seized for the public good.

I find I have to supplement BBC (general news source) with news web sites on particular issues, for instance, www.venezuelanalysis.com is excellent on Hugo Chavez and the democratic revolution in South America, and www.narconews.org was the only reliable source on what was really happening in the huge social uprising in Oaxaca in southern Mexico. Asia Times (www.atimes.com) is also quite good (--some excellent articles by Pepe Escobar on the U.S., and if you want to be informed on Asian affairs, as well as Asia/US issues, this is where to go). I also highly recommend Scoop in New Zealand (www.scoop.co.nz). Scoop has better reporting on US election fraud/election reform than any news organization in the States (and features DU's own Autorank). Also, the International Herald Tribune (IHT) can sometimes be quite good (far better than Reuters, which has drunk too much Wolfowitz-Negroponte Kook-Aid on South America). APF (French news service) is also worth consulting--they often have the edge of truthful and objective reporting--that extra bit of balancing or more detailed information that puts things in perspective, so lacking in outfits like AP and Reuters.

For U.S. news sources, I'd stick with the Daily Show. You can't go wrong.

And of course Democracy Now, AAR (not so good since they dumped Mike Malloy--but they still have always-up-to-the-minute Randi), www.novamradio.com (9 pm ET) for Mike, and Indy Media of various kinds. Not to mention THE DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, as a great general news site, culling from sundry sources, and with raucous (and sometimes erudite) commentary.

[Broadslidin]

7. "Supplement" is surely, a key word...!

Tremendous suggestions and overall comment. Thank You.