I've been enjoying The Economist and Aljazeera lately. Intelligent news that covers important things happening all over the world, not just the USA.

I'm also interested in the same question. It's hard to find news that is both covering important long-term issues and trying to seek the truth of the matter. Plus I get frustrated at how insular news in the USA is, many of the USAs problems have already been somewhat solved in other countries but the media rarely mentions them. So citizens and politicians waste time spinning their wheels and arguing about theoreticals instead of learning from experiments that have already been done.

NoAgendaShow.com; a podcast that covers a wide variety of topics. They are listener funded, so they arent subject to pleasing advertiser (as these 6 big corporation and most news outlets).

One of the hosts is also the 'co-founder of podcasting', took a company public and registered mtv.com, back in the day. They have a very interesting news media deconstruction process; Highly recommended.

Steve Jobs himself gave him the title "The Podfather"

Drudge and Breditbart may peddle a narrative that's more pleasing to you than mainstream media, but it's very biased and sensationalist.

The OP is about media that isn't owned by one of the big 6 mega-corps, not about media that is bias-free. There's no such thing as bias-free media, because media is written / edited / produced by humans who inherently have bias.

OANN rocks! Been very happy with it.

OAN's talking heads are obviously conservative, but if you want a REAL news reel with no trash, theirs is easily the quickest and most informative. And they play that more than pundits, which is nice.

Eh. Tough question. You don't want to make the mistake of using sources with an opposite mindset to the prevailing media.

Prevailing media has a strong democratic bias. Opposing media has a strong republican bias (breitbart, oann, etc).

Better media doesn't give a shit. I suggest sott.net, global research, strategic culture, mises.org, the intercept, reason, opslens, the unz review, counterpunch, zerohedge.

KEEP IN MIND: all of these sources require a STRONG BS filter. It's like startups v established companies: lots of bullshit with diamonds in the rough thrown in. It's your job to find the diamonds. When you find them, they're totally worth it.

Those should get you started. In general, I tend to also follow a host of individuals on twitter of varying backgrounds to get a greater variety.

Brietbart and oann have strong republican bias but mises and reason don't? /:

From what I've read on Mises they are big on numbers, data, citing sources and logic. They don't deserve to be grouped with the others.

Mises are shills for failed economic theories and peddle dumb conspiracy theories.

You're free to criticize their economics, but their bias for everyday news tends to be more objective than that most others.

Which failed economic theories and failed how exactly?

'Austrian' economics.

Failed how?

Austrian economics is just an outdated theory. Principles of Economics and Das Kapital were written within about four years of each other and while time was poking holes in Communism it was doing the same to Austrian economics. Here's a good argument against the Austrian school if you're really interested.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm

So Newton's Laws of Motion are just "an outdated theory" because they were published in 1686?

And, I am sorry, but the paper you quote is just pseudo-intellectual drivel. If I could decipher anything from it, it boiled down to "because there is no such thing as perfect free market, therefore Austrian School is flawed".

Or something like that.

>So Newton's Laws of Motion are just "an outdated theory" because they were published in 1686?

No, the point is that science has advanced. The laws of motion are true because they've survived scientific critique over a long period of time. Aether isn't true because over time the scientific critiques built up and science moved on with new theories. Austrian economics is aether not the laws of motion.

>If I could decipher anything from it...

If you had trouble deciphering it I would suggest that you not subscribe to any economic school because you just don't know enough to pick.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough".

-- Albert Einstein

Correct. Mises and Reason are libertarian, not republican.