How news is part 2
 

#1. X is biased, as are all news sources.

#2. If John Doe uses news source X for a long time, Doe will be biased as well.

#3. If Doe uses news source X for a long time, it will become harder to convince Doe that X is biased.

#4. Replace X with whatever news source you primarily use, and replace Doe with you.

discuss

I concur. Initially I my news source was my family - primarily my parents. Then started using the available media at that time. Now there are so many varying perspectives that ts difficult to discern what the truth is. Many of them are positioned under the guise of being "watchdogs" or "nonpartisan". (See #1 above)
Its tough. I try to get a much info from different sides and then decide. Its not easy & some times those early biases creep back into the subconscious.
My personal experiences have, and continue to shape my views.

I am biased, there's no doubt, but there is absolutely no way in hell I can watch Fox News just to balance the equation. While channel surfing, my husband will pause there sometimes just to keep abreast of the nonsense. If I am in the room with him when he does that, I complain loudly to change the channel quickly. Lately I have been immensely enjoying the prime time commentary on MSNBC, but I am really only watching because the elections are coming up.

I sometimes watch Al Jazeera. My news comes mostly from the paper, and the local Fox affiliate. But local news doesn't count. It's just car crashes and murder.

I love morning Joe on MSNBC, but the Matthews,Olbermann & Maddow lineup are nothing more than the same thing for the left as Fox is for the right. Especially the latter - All they do is take pot shots at each other. My time spent on them has been severely reduced. Time spent watching Fox is virtually a zero.

... and fires glatt - don't forget the fires.

I can't believe I forgot the fires. And how could I forget the guy standing out in the rain saying "It's raining."

I think all of us are continually on the hunt for media, news and otherwise, that reinforces our existing beliefs. After all, what choir doesn't want to be preached to, affirming what they know to be true?

It's kind of comforting to know you are right.
(A friend of mine says: "Every body in the world is crazy except for me and you. And sometimes, I'm not so sure about you..."

The Cellar is my news source.

#3a. Doe will find that other sources are not trustworthy compared to X, because they do not match his priorities and his information, although Doe's priorities and information come from X.

I addressed this notion previously, in this reply to UG.

Why do you listen to WXYZ?

Because they play all the best music!!

How do you know it's the best music?

Because that's the music they play on WXYZ!!

I think you're thinking of CKLW, another Detroit station.

"You're listening to WXYZ. The songs we play may not be your favorites, but they have a lot of the same notes!"

The Celar is biased.:p:

How does your model account for aggregate sources (google news), sources chosen in challenge to the biases of J. Doe (a well-reasoned yet disagreed-with blog), and sources that are, while biased, too schizophrenic to have a coherent bias of agenda or politics (the cellar)?

I follow about 40 RSS feeds, not including a compulsive skimming of google news and a few other sites that I read directly. I know I'm biased, because I only read what interests me. But at what point do you draw the line between 'bias' and 'personality' or 'a well-formed opinion'?