British Media. Let’s have a change please!

No - there is no truly objective news anywhere.

I object less to this than the fact that the media are manufacturing news and leading the public by the nose.

For example, Farage is a meaningless nonentity with no concrete policies but there he is front and centre of the news outlets and approached for comment all the time. We are all being set up, so the media can milk a bit of controversy and manipulate the public.

It is sickening.

I know this won't be universally popular, but the BBC is still one of my "go to" news sources. At least they usually give sources, which can then be followed up.

^My plea is to please have at least one place I can go and read news. both national and international, which is accurate, non-biased and actually “news”!
^

Absolutely!
I have got to the same point.

Though I do console myself that perhaps there isnt as much news as there was? Which would be a good thing.
[Yes I know about wars going on].

I joined tw itter a few years ago.
Rarely go on it now.
I have wondered about changing who I follow.
Would I get to hear more "news"?
I dont know.

I haven't contributed to Twitter (X) for years, but I do read it. I want to find out what's going on outside my bubble.

Agree with all above points made. Especially how the media ‘set the agenda’ ie decide what we will focus on/talk about that day. And more importantly, what we won’t. I flit around online sources and watch C4 News ( best of an inadequate lot imo). But best of all is the Financial Times on a Saturday. Some real in-depth journalism and accurate information. If covers a range of topics

I find that Reuters tend to publish just the facts without any of their own views.
I still find the BBC is good mostly.

The thing is though that facts on their own are not enough are they? Context, analysis and interpretation are needed from well informed commentators who have really done their homework.

I like Reuters too AGAA4, and I also rate the Financial Times for news. Both of them have reporters who take a step back from the hysterics of mainstream media, so present quite balanced views of what is really important.

I meant to add that it’s easy to distort the truth by the facts that are omitted not just the ones included

The BBC is good but sometimes the Daily Mail covers a story which is quite shocking (they love it) and the BBC ignores it completely. So you're probably best to read more than one because they don't always cover the same stories at all.

Thank you for your well thought out and honest answers.

I guess I’ll stick to several sources and expand the areas in which I search!

Maybe the BBC ignore it because the DM has made it up or really over egged the actual facts.

Casdon

I like Reuters too AGAA4, and I also rate the Financial Times for news. Both of them have reporters who take a step back from the hysterics of mainstream media, so present quite balanced views of what is really important.

Do you pay for both those sources?

Like twaddle I just read the BBC website.

No, you can read a limited number of articles free per month, and I use Borrowbox from the library otherwise fancythat,

Oh yes I’d forgotten the library link -mines called Press Reader and has a huge number of publications available all for free but sadly not the FT.

Tuliptree

Oh yes I’d forgotten the library link -mines called Press Reader and has a huge number of publications available all for free but sadly not the FT.

Oh thanks for this, I’ll try these x