Daily news video - 20 to 30 minutes

[mrmicro]

Are there any good sources of daily unbiased news in video format that folks use to keep up with the daily happenings in US and around the world? Looking for something in the 20-30 minute range and should include real news (World, US, finance, sports etc.). Willing to pay for quality access. Thanks

[jebmke]

All news is biased if for no other reason than the selection of stories fed to you. Among other reasons, this is why I avoid cable and other video news aggregators as well as news feeds (like Google).

[stoptothink]

All news is biased if for no other reason than the selection of stories fed to you. Among other reasons, this is why I avoid cable and other video news aggregators as well as news feeds (like Google).

+1 Their primary purpose is entertainment and even if a source was technically just relaying facts, the facts that they highlight (and what they don't) is bias itself. Google "least biased new sources" and everything that comes up is comically biased, and there isn't even an attempt to hide it. "Breaking Points" on Youtube and Spotify is interesting because the two hosts sit on different ends of the political spectrum, but having watched it a few times, it's not necessarily straight facts either.

[Sandtrap]

All news is biased if for no other reason than the selection of stories fed to you. Among other reasons, this is why I avoid cable and other video news aggregators as well as news feeds (like Google).

+1
Conformity bias, collective illusion, cognitive bias, implicit cognitive and perception bias, et al.
Additionally, even in Jounalism 360, articles are written with a purpose. For who? what? etc. Then, edited many times along the way. Now, speedily written to conform to or otherwise, whatever "news/information" source is outputting (read by consumers of information, products, financial products, et al).
Entertainment or news packaged as information entertainment??

Thus, consume all information "feeds" no matter the medium, with the high discretion of seasoned boglehead (like this poster "jebmke").
Think...who is selling me what, convincing me what, provoking a reaction or response, invoking agreement and reinforcement, or...?
Pretend to be your own "moderator" of your "personal forum brain".

j

[jebmke]

All news is biased if for no other reason than the selection of stories fed to you. Among other reasons, this is why I avoid cable and other video news aggregators as well as news feeds (like Google).

+1 Their primary purpose is entertainment and even if a source was technically just relaying facts, the facts that they highlight (and what they don't) is bias itself. Google "least biased new sources" and everything that comes up is comically biased, and there isn't even an attempt to hide it. "Breaking Points" on Youtube and Spotify is interesting because the two hosts sit on different ends of the political spectrum, but having watched it a few times, it's not necessarily straight facts either.

The other problem I have is with video (and audio) news is that they are inefficient forms of information consumption and tend to be very reductive. However, if I am driving, audio is really the only option.

[SevenBridgesRoad]

Years back, I thought long and hard about "news" and why I might want to consume less. You might want to do the same.

Start with, what problem are you trying to solve (the problem for which you've decided the solution is 30 minutes of video news...unbiased... once a day)? What does "keeping up with daily happenings" even mean? If the problem you are trying to solve is, "I'm not keeping up with daily happenings", then it's nontrivial to define what keeping up with daily happenings means. And then, why not keeping up with daily happenings is problematic.

[Sandtrap]

All news is biased if for no other reason than the selection of stories fed to you. Among other reasons, this is why I avoid cable and other video news aggregators as well as news feeds (like Google).

+1 Their primary purpose is entertainment and even if a source was technically just relaying facts, the facts that they highlight (and what they don't) is bias itself. Google "least biased new sources" and everything that comes up is comically biased, and there isn't even an attempt to hide it. "Breaking Points" on Youtube and Spotify is interesting because the two hosts sit on different ends of the political spectrum, but having watched it a few times, it's not necessarily straight facts either.

+1
outstanding!!!!!

j

[mrmicro]

That is truly unfortunate. I assumed there would be some video or audio source that would allow me to know the top N things that happen in a day. The aim was to not fall behind. The problem i am trying to solve is that i find myself parsing through cnn, bbc, nytimes etc. and feel it takes a lot of time to truly parse real news and consume it.

[cs412a]

That is truly unfortunate. I assumed there would be some video or audio source that would allow me to know the top N things that happen in a day. The aim was to not fall behind. The problem i am trying to solve is that i find myself parsing through cnn, bbc, nytimes etc. and feel it takes a lot of time to truly parse real news and consume it.

My local NPR station has a 6-minute news break every hour on the hour: 5 minutes of national news, 1 minute of local news. It covers the top events. If you want something more in depth, how about the PBS News Hour or the Reuters website (https://www.reuters.com/)?

[zhiwiller]

That is truly unfortunate. I assumed there would be some video or audio source that would allow me to know the top N things that happen in a day. The aim was to not fall behind. The problem i am trying to solve is that i find myself parsing through cnn, bbc, nytimes etc. and feel it takes a lot of time to truly parse real news and consume it.

Not video, but I subscribe to 1440 news (join1440.com). They send an email newsletter every day with the daily headlines. There's usually a couple interesting links in there that I end up following. But overall, it's a quick summary of the "daily happenings". Quicker than video too since it is easy to parse.

[Sandtrap]

That is truly unfortunate. I assumed there would be some video or audio source that would allow me to know the top N things that happen in a day. The aim was to not fall behind. The problem i am trying to solve is that i find myself parsing through cnn, bbc, nytimes etc. and feel it takes a lot of time to truly parse real news and consume it.

Consider that there are mostly only 6 entities in the West, (CONUS), etc, and online mainstream, media, entertainment, et al, that own or control everything. Each has a focus and subfocus, agenda, et al. (google it).
https://www.webfx.com/blog/internet/the ... fographic/
This is a basic article about this. It's been known all over for some time and there's much on it if one looks.
The impications are profound.

As an aside, after knowing this:
Read: W. Bernstein (hardcover amazon) "Delusions of Crowds".

j

[jebmke]

That is truly unfortunate. I assumed there would be some video or audio source that would allow me to know the top N things that happen in a day. The aim was to not fall behind. The problem i am trying to solve is that i find myself parsing through cnn, bbc, nytimes etc. and feel it takes a lot of time to truly parse real news and consume it.

An additional problem with "breaking news" feeds is that they are often mostly devoid of information since they break so fast that reporters really know very little. I find that if there is a newsworthy story it takes a few days before any in depth reporting is done. Most "news" articles I read about an event today or yesterday is mostly background filler or speculation. Often the story changes, even subtly after a few days and more information is known. More times than not, the story is irrelevant.

When I moved into senior management, a wise mentor of mine advised me that 80% of the time, the right approach to something new is to do nothing. Among the many reasons he advised that is that often the facts as we know them change as time passes.

[anon_investor]

Are there any good sources of daily unbiased news in video format that folks use to keep up with the daily happenings in US and around the world? Looking for something in the 20-30 minute range and should include real news (World, US, finance, sports etc.). Willing to pay for quality access. Thanks

Not 20-30 minutes, but I always find the PBS News Hour good. It is available free daily on Youtube.

[Glockenspiel]

Generally, NPR, PBS News Hour are good for factual reporting and high credibility, given that you already read the NYT.

NPR has an Up First podcast in audio format that is only 15 minutes a day and a Politics podcast that is also 15 minutes a day.

[stoptothink]

Years back, I thought long and hard about "news" and why I might want to consume less. You might want to do the same.

Start with, what problem are you trying to solve (the problem for which you've decided the solution is 30 minutes of video news...unbiased... once a day)? What does "keeping up with daily happenings" even mean? If the problem you are trying to solve is, "I'm not keeping up with daily happenings", then it's nontrivial to define what keeping up with daily happenings means. And then, why not keeping up with daily happenings is problematic.

Great post. People say they want to be "informed", but for what purpose? How does it really impact your daily life?

There is absolutely a correlation between how much "news" I consume and my attitude. The more I consume, the more negative my attitude. I have noticed this in other people as well (friends and family) and it makes no difference where on the political spectrum they fall.

[jebmke]

Years back, I thought long and hard about "news" and why I might want to consume less. You might want to do the same.

Start with, what problem are you trying to solve (the problem for which you've decided the solution is 30 minutes of video news...unbiased... once a day)? What does "keeping up with daily happenings" even mean? If the problem you are trying to solve is, "I'm not keeping up with daily happenings", then it's nontrivial to define what keeping up with daily happenings means. And then, why not keeping up with daily happenings is problematic.

Great post. People say they want to be "informed", but for what purpose? How does it really impact your daily life?

There is absolutely a correlation between how much "news" I consume and my attitude. The more I consume, the more negative my attitude. I have noticed this in other people as well (friends and family) and it makes no difference where on the political spectrum they fall.

I'd say that the answer to your first question varies based on how local the news is. Unfortunately, local news is harder to get now but probably more relevant for most people.

[ThankYouJack]

I don't consume a lot of it, but I find the "War on News" unfortunate. The OP is looking for a quick unbiased video that covers numerous topics -- I don't see any problems with that. Some people want to stay informed with things ranging from sports to world events. Will most sources be biased, maybe, but I think it gets overblown.

For those who don't follow news where do you get your information? (I hope not from social media feeds)

[hunoraut]

Generally, NPR, PBS News Hour are good for factual reporting and high credibility, given that you already read the NYT.

NPR has an Up First podcast in audio format that is only 15 minutes a day and a Politics podcast that is also 15 minutes a day.

NPR used to have credibility, but it's far too editorialized now. Lots of activists imposing their personal opinion now in the "journalism" world.

For pure reporting of news, I would say the least colored are the wire services and news agencies: Associated Press; Reuters; AFP. I'm not aware of a video collation service, but they do have video feed with mini snippets.

This doesn't mean they are infallible - far from it - because simply reporting on news doesn't mean having covered the full truth. But in general, I find that more reliable than the traditional TV/newsprint entities.

[delamer]

BBC News and BBC News America (both on PBS) are 30 minute shows that give a wider perspective than the other networks’ very US-centered coverage.

[jebmke]

BBC News and BBC News America (both on PBS) are 30 minute shows that give a wider perspective than the other networks’ very US-centered coverage.

I often listen to the hour BBC program which comes on at 9am I think (on the station I listen to). I find the interviewer for BBC is vastly superior to most on US broadcasts.

[SmallSaver]

It's true that there is no such thing as unbiased news, and letting go of that notion is a helpful lends. With that said, good news should be rigorous and truthful. I'll recommend Democracy Now. Their political leanings are clear, but the quality of their reporting is top notch and they avoid many of the problems people are bringing up in this thread. The full show is an hour, but the first 10-15 minutes are headlines.

[strummer6969]

It's true that there is no such thing as unbiased news, and letting go of that notion is a helpful lends. With that said, good news should be rigorous and truthful. I'll recommend Democracy Now. Their political leanings are clear, but the quality of their reporting is top notch and they avoid many of the problems people are bringing up in this thread. The full show is an hour, but the first 10-15 minutes are headlines.

I like both biased (both sides) and unbiased new sources. It sounds strange enough. But I know that many (maybe most?) people are consuming biased news so it helps me understand how other people are thinking about things.

[porridge]

PBS Newshour is excellent and stays as close to center as you can find. It’s available in both video and podcast form. It’s longer than you’re wanting, but frequently the second half is more cultural happenings - I frequently skip around and end up spending maybe 20min average on any given day.

[Glockenspiel]

I don't consume a lot of it, but I find the "War on News" unfortunate. The OP is looking for a quick unbiased video that covers numerous topics -- I don't see any problems with that. Some people want to stay informed with things ranging from sports to world events. Will most sources be biased, maybe, but I think it gets overblown.

For those who don't follow news where do you get your information? (I hope not from social media feeds)

I fear most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles.

[stoptothink]

I don't consume a lot of it, but I find the "War on News" unfortunate. The OP is looking for a quick unbiased video that covers numerous topics -- I don't see any problems with that. Some people want to stay informed with things ranging from sports to world events. Will most sources be biased, maybe, but I think it gets overblown.

For those who don't follow news where do you get your information? (I hope not from social media feeds)

I fear most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles.

I don't use social media pretty much at all (I have professional social media profiles, but have almost nothing to do with them - a social media specialist does it for my employer) and I watch "news" very sparingly and only in passing. In the past, I found that my primary motivation for watching it at all was to be able to argue with my siblings (two specifically), whose political leanings direct their entire lives. That wasn't good for my relationship with them or for me personally. When I get together with other people, the news is the last thing I want to be discussing.

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

[SevenBridgesRoad]

I don't consume a lot of it, but I find the "War on News" unfortunate. The OP is looking for a quick unbiased video that covers numerous topics -- I don't see any problems with that. Some people want to stay informed with things ranging from sports to world events. Will most sources be biased, maybe, but I think it gets overblown.

For those who don't follow news where do you get your information? (I hope not from social media feeds)

I fear most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles.

I'm just an N=1 of course, but I am on zero social media. As to your observation, why did you come to this conclusion ("fear")?

[SevenBridgesRoad]

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

Great question.

[2b2]

I disagree that most news is "entertainment", although I used to think so.
Recently, I've come to the opinion that the main driver of the Opinion News Broadcasts is to keep eyes or ears on the screen or on the radio station through the next set of advertisements. They know their audiences well, and they try very hard to keep those audiences outraged enough, or scared enough, or simply concerned enough to sit through the next series of commercials.

Guess what that does to their ad revenue.

2b2

[Glockenspiel]

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

Great question.

By not being informed, they relinquish their right to have an opinion when talking with others about current events.

[Glockenspiel]

I fear most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles.

I'm just an N=1 of course, but I am on zero social media. As to your observation, why did you come to this conclusion ("fear")?

Social media is entirely full of inaccuracies, embellishments, exaggerations, and falsehoods. Those people then believe these falsehoods and share their falsehoods with others.

[SevenBridgesRoad]

I fear most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles.

I'm just an N=1 of course, but I am on zero social media. As to your observation, why did you come to this conclusion ("fear")?

Social media is entirely full of inaccuracies, embellishments, exaggerations, and falsehoods. Those people then believe these falsehoods and share their falsehoods with others.

You didn't explain " most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles". I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm truly curious about why you believe this.

[SevenBridgesRoad]

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

Great question.

By not being informed, they relinquish their right to have an opinion when talking with others about current events.

Who says I'm not informed?

[ThankYouJack]

I don't consume a lot of it, but I find the "War on News" unfortunate. The OP is looking for a quick unbiased video that covers numerous topics -- I don't see any problems with that. Some people want to stay informed with things ranging from sports to world events. Will most sources be biased, maybe, but I think it gets overblown.

For those who don't follow news where do you get your information? (I hope not from social media feeds)

I fear most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles.

Me too, especially after watching the Social Dilemma and knowing how active some of my friends are on it. And seeing a couple of them go off the rails.

I don't consume a lot of it, but I find the "War on News" unfortunate. The OP is looking for a quick unbiased video that covers numerous topics -- I don't see any problems with that. Some people want to stay informed with things ranging from sports to world events. Will most sources be biased, maybe, but I think it gets overblown.

For those who don't follow news where do you get your information? (I hope not from social media feeds)

I fear most people who don't follow news and have a negative association with news only get news from their social media circles.

I don't use social media pretty much at all (I have professional social media profiles, but have almost nothing to do with them - a social media specialist does it for my employer) and I watch "news" very sparingly and only in passing. In the past, I found that my primary motivation for watching it at all was to be able to argue with my siblings (two specifically), whose political leanings direct their entire lives. That wasn't good for my relationship with them or for me personally. When I get together with other people, the news is the last thing I want to be discussing.

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

Depends on the person and what they care about or consider important. Could be anything from sports scores to the war in Ukraine.

I feel similar that news doesn't add a lot of value to my life but if someone wants to stay informed about world events, finance, and sports and enjoys watching it, that's the least of my worries.

[ThankYouJack]

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

Great question.

By not being informed, they relinquish their right to have an opinion when talking with others about current events.

Who says I'm not informed?

Where do you get your information from?

[Glockenspiel]

Me too, especially after watching the Social Dilemma and knowing how active some of my friends are on it. And seeing a couple of them go off the rails.

Yup. My in-laws have essentially gone off the rails since retiring and moving to their retirement home. Every time they visit, I try to avoid discussing anything news related, but they are constantly complaining about things they "heard" from the "news", which consists of their slanted TV shows and social media. It doesn't make it enjoyable to visit them or have them stay with us at our home.

[roamingzebra]

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

People who don't follow the news may miss out in subtle (or not so subtle) changes in our form of government.

Related to this is changes in laws that can have an enormous impact on people's lives and liberty.

For the OP, if he/she just wants a sense of what's going on, the scanning of any mainstream newspaper will do that. But to dig into issues and understand them and their importance, sometimes going to specialized sites such as legal ones helps to understand tricky and important Constitutional issues.

[alex_686]

A good answer is to pick 2 high quality news sources, with one of them on the opposite side of your normal position. It is healthy to actively engage with a different challenging viewpoint.

I favor audio. NPR for daily updates, The Economist for weekly long form in depth analysis- audio available via subscription.

Both have their slants, which is inherent as mentioned above. But they don’t let opinion overrule truth.

[rockstar]

I like Ryan Hall for overall weather of the US. His videos come out once a week, and they’re less than 10 minutes long. If a weather event is happening, he’ll go live. He’s been pretty accurate. Otherwise windows weather is good enough for the day to day locally. And I’ll do specific digging for trail conditions when hiking.

For unbiased, you can read the business and politics updates in the beginning of the Economist. It hits the high points.

Between Google maps and my local DOT, I’m covered with road closures.

What specific info are you looking for? The rest of the news tends to be around crime and city planning. No reason to watch a full news program. I can get those highlights via YouTube->News->local.

This should be good enough unless you want your news to elicit an emotional response. Then you want biased news.

[rockstar]

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

Great question.

By not being informed, they relinquish their right to have an opinion when talking with others about current events.

Does it really matter? The most “informed” people I know make the most emotionally informed decisions.

[Stinky]

A good answer is to pick 2 high quality news sources, with one of them on the opposite side of your normal position. It is healthy to actively engage with a different challenging viewpoint.

I agree.

My two choices are The NY Times and the Wall Street Journal. I usually agree with one, and often disagree with the other.

At least I feel like I’m pretty informed.

And I definitely stay away from almost all TV news and political shows. They’ll get your blood pressure up for no good reason.

[investnoob]

I believe PBS newshour is streamed live on youtube each day. If you miss a stream, they usually have the previous one uploaded.

[KFBR392]

PBS Newshour (YouTube) and BBC Newshour (audio - I listen on Spotify).

My rule of thumb is news should be somewhat boring. If it's entertaining or gets your blood pressure up, its priority is not informing you.

I avoid all cable news (see above) as well as local news, which is mostly just crime reporting and repurposed viral videos.

[Pdxnative]

+1 for PBS Newshour, BBC, NPR—given that you asked for video and audio.

The quick rundown at the start of Newshour is usually only 5-10 minutes and probably accomplishes what you’re looking for. Then you can fast forward to any of the 4-5 segments if those are of interest. YouTube feed is available right away.

[stoptothink]

Legitimate question, what important information are those who do not watch news and are not active on social media missing out on?

Great question.

By not being informed, they relinquish their right to have an opinion when talking with others about current events.

Does it really matter? The most “informed” people I know make the most emotionally informed decisions.

This x1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

[alex_686]

I favor audio. NPR for daily updates, ...

To be super specific, I listen to "Up First", drops early in the morning, about 15 minutes long. This hits the highlights. Or sometimes a single cycle on the radio to get some local news as well.

[ClevrChico]

There's lot of great recommendations in this thread. I'm really liking this from the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/22/podc ... o-app.html

It's a podcast, audio only, and ten minutes. It's very low key and great to listen to at the end of a long day. You'll need a NY subscription (free from your library possibly) and it will be IOS only for the initial release.

[LadyGeek]

This thread has run its course and is locked (derailed on social media and news bias). See: Personal Consumer Issues

Note that this subforum has a much lower threshold for locking or removing posts than the financial and investing subforums. In general, controversial, offensive, pointless, divisive or mean-spirited posts or topics may be locked, edited or deleted (with or without notice) at the discretion of the moderating staff even if they do not otherwise violate forum policies.