Lyin' Steve
SteveMcQueen
Sr. Member
Posts: 3,310
|
|
« on: August 17, 2016, 01:27:58 AM » |
|
Politico, Vox and DailyBeast occasionally have good stuff but it's mostly tabloidy junk. Their long, well-developed pieces are solid though. I usually only read what RCP has in its aggregator.
NYT and WaPo are good for news but I don't get much else out of them. The columns tend to not rise to a level of analysis that I'd like and I don't really enjoy the human interest or "bet you didn't know about this" filler stories they have.
I won't miss a Peggy Noonan column in WSJ. I thoroughly enjoy 70-80% of what she writes.
I don't read Economist or Foreign Policy Mag but if people asked me I'd say I did.
I have never been glad that I read something on 538, always regret wasting my team reading empty junk, but for some reason I still impulsively visit it.
On the same note, when I have the itch for breaking news I'll impulsively type CNN in, but I'm never happy I went there.
Finally, every now and then the Weekly Standard will surprise me with a good article. Which is more than can be said for the National Review, which these days is basically just Breitbart with a smarter-sounding name.
Of those listed, Drudge, Salon, InfoWars, Breitbart, the Caller, Wonkette, Gawker, EverydayFeminism and The Young Turks have a special place of lothing in my book for either being inflammatory clickbait, self-absorbed snark, or just flat out lying for clicks most of the time. Drudge is literally the National Enquirer of the right-wing internet and the Daily Caller desperately wishes it was Drudge. It's ok to have an angle, like National Review, but when you're just willfully and knowingly making the world a worse place for clicks and profit, you can go to hell.
|