Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 03/21/2005 1:55:15 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: GummyIII; farmfriend; Clemenza; mhking; Alouette; SJackson; DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; ...

ping


2 posted on 03/21/2005 1:55:41 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar
Sometimes.

Sometimes not.

Like Debka.

3 posted on 03/21/2005 1:57:16 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

At least as legitimate as CBS.


4 posted on 03/21/2005 1:57:25 PM PST by lawnguy (But we both know I'm training to be a cage fighter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

I consider them to be news sources, but some news sources are more legitimate than others.


5 posted on 03/21/2005 1:57:34 PM PST by cyborg (Sudanese refugee,"Mr.Schiavo I disagree with your opinion about not feeling pain when you starve.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Sometimes. Just have to keep it mind they have a bias. A conservative one, but still a bias.


6 posted on 03/21/2005 1:57:47 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Not all the time - too tabloid for me. But they do have interesting stuff in them sometimes.


7 posted on 03/21/2005 1:58:02 PM PST by areafiftyone (The Democrat's Mind: The Hamster's dead but the wheel's still spinning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

As legitimate as any other news source, often more on top of things than the MSM.


8 posted on 03/21/2005 1:58:41 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Yes


9 posted on 03/21/2005 1:59:39 PM PST by beeler (Shoot first, ask questions later.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Eh sure, why not. The quantity and quality of their news might not be that good, but they still have their own original reporting (at least, last time I visited they did).


10 posted on 03/21/2005 2:01:50 PM PST by MitchellC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Sometimes. Doesn't hurt to cross-check, but that's true of any source.


11 posted on 03/21/2005 2:01:57 PM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Newshacks reads as if it's written by some guy in his underwear sitting on a food stained couch watching television and radio and calling it news.

World News Daily is a smidgen better.


13 posted on 03/21/2005 2:15:33 PM PST by Hillary's Lovely Legs (Pedro offers you his protection)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

They're a disappointment, IMO. Don't seem to have any more interest in presenting the story straight than does the MSM. Quotes out of context, etc. I got disgusted with their sophomoric approach a long time ago...such a waste, too. The left does plenty enough looney stuff for them to be able to just tell the story straight up w/o sounding like a cheap Brit tabloid.


14 posted on 03/21/2005 2:18:36 PM PST by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

More than CNN, CBS, ABC, or NBC.


18 posted on 03/21/2005 2:36:30 PM PST by JFK_Lib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar
I would NEVER link to either one of these when I want to maximize credibility of a piece of information. I think WND is worse than NewsMax.

On the other hand, sometimes it is useful, as a conservative, to get their angles.

19 posted on 03/21/2005 2:36:55 PM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

I don't. In fact, I like to play a little game called "Guess The Newsmax Headline". When I see something unbelievable and inflammatory on the latest posts page, I say to myself, "Newsmax", and I'm usually spot on. : )

WND seems like it's been getting worse.


21 posted on 03/21/2005 6:03:45 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Gnome sayin'?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

I'm not overly enthused about either one. Sometimes they have good information though.


22 posted on 03/21/2005 7:49:38 PM PST by rdl6989
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

yes


23 posted on 03/21/2005 10:50:25 PM PST by farmfriend ( Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?!?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Hal Lindsey is a colunist for World Net Daily. I don't need to know anything more.


24 posted on 03/25/2005 9:37:38 AM PST by warchild9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Bumped for relevance
25 posted on 02/17/2006 10:28:37 AM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: EveningStar

Absolutely.

More so in many cases than the "news for sale" media elites.

Of course, I'd guess that Newsmax and WND are both willing to publish for pay just like the others, they just aren't asked as often.


26 posted on 02/17/2006 10:32:11 AM PST by WhiteGuy (Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson