* caters to fellow old fart *

err.... print.

All journalism is skewed in favor of the "news story." Which means that regardless of any political agenda, things that are new and things which lend themselves to a narrative ( preferably with a protagonist or antagonist ) will get press in a way that coverage on older stories, and one with "drier" content will not.

Theres also the basic bias towards alarmism. Nobody ever sold a paper by saying, "You're basically gonna be fine whether you read this or not."

But TV was always a sensation prone medium with its "sweeps weeks" even before the 24 hour news cycle was invented along with the need to alarm and upset 24/7.

But on the whole, the basic coverage by the McClatchey, AP and Reuters isn't half bad as a place to start. After that its mostly triangulation from various sources and realizing who sets off the red flags.

But most of the time just waiting long enough for real reporters to turn in news that's fit to print is enough.

It also helps to be interested enough in these issues to be reading up in the various books that have been released over the years.

After John Stewart interviewed the author on the Daily Show, I decided to read Pay Any Price. So as soon as the hawks started attacking the Senate Torture Report and the CIA started pretending that they were just trying to get info, I knew that they were lying. Because the "enhanced interrogations" program was openly admitted to be an adaptations of the techniques of the ARMY and NAVY's SERE schools. And the first things that SERE has been teaching those about to undergo these techniques is that they ARE war crimes, they ARE torture, and that they're designed to get people to say false things and even come to believe false things; but that torture cannot produce valid data.

Now had they not merely gone to the first slide in the SERE powerpoint presentation but to the extensive studies of the effects of these techniques, they would have found that from a medical POV its torture. And that these techniques actually INHIBIT memory recall and can both permanently damage these memories as well as implant the false info being coerced.

But do beware of stories that you can find no source for who isn't b*tshit crazy. In other words, if the only people breaking some story about an NSA plot are those who believe in our saucer overlords or that Ghod speaks to them from stormclouds, then just admit that you can't find a credible source.

A reliable story being repeated at "saucer central" just means finding its original non-batty source. But if nobody but the Messiah and the UFO contactees want to tell you this nugget about the Fed, then its probably not legit.

It can be particularly difficult for anyone questioning the standard myths. Because real historical conspiracies like Iran/Contra get mixed up with the Holocaust deniers and others.

But real conspiracies are carried out by real humans who are flawed and leave all sorts of real evidence that requires no telepathic interpretations. Fund set aside for the "burglars we've never heard of" in Watergate &tc.

Anywho. Much is out there and is being published as mainstream reportage. Or in books from major imprints of uncontroversial publishers. Its amazing just how mainstream the stories are which get investigative journalists interrogated or forced into exile. Though less surprizing since the war on Whistleblowers has taken a massive upswing.

Dante