ilovefuzz.com

The BBC isnt immune from bias, no agency is, bt theyre still pretty good.
Locally the Australian ABC and SBS have been outstanding and Al Jazeera are usually pretty good, as are DW.
Youd be surprised as to how many of our news agencies have correspondents located across the US.
I'd hate to break it to you guys like this but, well, you make the most entertaining news.

You've got the internet, Snip, why not just have a poke aroubd some of the foreign news services?

Iommic Pope wrote:Al Jazeera

Absolutely cannot fucking stand Al Jazeera in the US.
Especially AJ+. Drives me insane.

Is it the US bureau?
We have to pay for it on cable over here, so I don't get to watch full coverage, but from what i've seen it's pretty good.

Iommic Pope wrote:Is it the US bureau?
We have to pay for it on cable over here, so I don't get to watch full coverage, but from what i've seen it's pretty good.

AFAIK Al Jazeera America was closed (also, I don't watch cable), but their stuff is splattered all over social media.

What's the big deal, so he likes to drink piss. Yogis do it for health and spiritual reasons. It's just water.

I'd kinda like to be in the room with every single person who voted for Trump when he or she realizes he's not really qualified to be POTUS.

If they haven't figured it out yet they won't until the second before a nuke hits us.

It's no fetish: Trump is just preparing for his role as ruler of the atoll.





He did get a guy from Exxon right?

Costner the new prophet?

It's also kinda hilarious that they can't find any entertainment for the inauguration.

… and not so hilarious that Trump is attacking Rep. John Lewis.

Chankgeez wrote:… and not so hilarious that Trump is attacking Rep. John Lewis.

The guy that said "I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected. And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton"?

Yeah. It's so sad. I'm crying inside.
Ignore my apathetic face.
And general lack of interest in the issue.

I think the jury's still out on the Russian involvement in influencing the election (or not).

I think people are entitled to a little speculation on that issue, but to say that Lewis is all talk is almost laughable.

There's still something I'd like to understand. How does a foreign power actually influences an election? (seriously, in every article I have read, it's postulated, never explained or demonstrated)

Influencing public opinion?

Especially in this internet age.

Mere suggestions of impropriety of any sort will usually lead to blind feeding frenzies of preposterous proportions.

It's all kinda nebulous though and there's no way to really measure it.

Disarm D'arcy wrote:There's still something I'd like to understand. How does a foreign power actually influences an election? (seriously, in every article I have read, it's postulated, never explained or demonstrated)

Yeah, the key is the word influence in the most indirect sense. They (allegedly) illegally accessed and made public information which may or may not have have impacted voters' decisions.

In my opinion, the actual effect on the election's outcome was minimal to non-existent. The implication that Russian leaders are playing favorites with the candidate who happened to win is a much larger concern.