A friend on Facebook shared this website and said he’s enjoyed getting his news from here because it tells both sides of the story.
What do you guys think? Is this a good place to get my news from and see what both sides think about current events?
Looks like a site that is subscription based (NTTAWWT) and generally ran by a single guy who has a support staff (part-time employees).
I’m skeptical about it ultimately being “non-partisan;” but I like its initial set up. What would be good is to have a few more full-time writers: one who covers “one side”, another who covers “the other side”, and a third who covers the “independent side”; with a senior editor (in this case, Isaac Saul) who can oversee the general presentation of material and provide a degree of consistency and oversight in what is published and when.
You can access most of the content for free. I signed up for the free subscription. I like that for each news article he has a section for what each of the left/right are saying, and then what his take is. I don’t watch a a lot of republican news, so I don’t know how accurate his reporting of what the right thinks is, but it seems good to me for the handful of articles I’ve read so far.
I’ll sign up for the “free” service; I can give you some insight on how well he’s representing the right.
I ended up paying for this. I’ve really enjoyed getting these short updates each day. Today’s article was an awesome interview about election fraud, and why there isn’t any.
Anyone else reading this newsletter?
Thanks for the reminder.
1 Like
So I have been reading this newsletter for a while now and really enjoy it. I think that regardless of what bias the author has, he does his best to present reasonable arguments on either side of any topic he is discussing. I have also had the opportunity to corresponded with him so I encourage anyone to at least give it a try. If you wonder if he is too left or too right for your tastes, in addition to sharing some responses he got to recent stories in today’s newsletter, here are 2 different readers who unsubscribed recently and why:
I saw that too and thought it was hilarious. You know you’re doing something right if you’re getting people to unsubscribe because you’re too far left and too far right.
Did you hear about this from this thread, or did you find it another way? Just curious.
I really like this newsletter.
Pretty sure I found it from this thread, so thank you BF!
Glad to know! I’ve gotten a few of my family members to subscribe. I think it’s a great newsletter, and like to get the word out when I can. I hope his newsletter continues to grow.
It’s also, he’ll find out, how you go out of the media business.
So, read while you can. Sounds great.
Maybe you could paste some articles here?
He said that most of the feedback he gets is positive. I think the negative feedback that Kenny posted is from people who are so mired in their beliefs that they aren’t even willing to acknowledge that there’s another side to things.
His newsletter has grown a lot over the past year, and I expect it to keep growing.
If there’s a newsletter I think worth pointing out I’ll start posting them here. For past editions, you can go to the website and look through them here: https://www.readtangle.com/
Thanks!
My net nanny is blocking all links in this thread. I can go all the way over to my home PC (in the next room), … maybe later.
As a paid subscriber I can give anyone a free month. Send me a pm of your email if you’re interested!
I’m honestly not sure why you’d need it though. 80% of the newsletter is free, so you have the opportunity to subscribe for free to see if you’d be interested in the Friday editions. But hey, I get entered to win stuff if people use my link, so hit me up.
Great article today about Sydney Powell. Apparently she’s using the same defense in court that Tucker Carlson used - that no reasonable person would believe what she said was truth.
“Your honor, I can’t be guilty because MAGA followers are idiots.”
It seems a common one. Our current Prime Minister’s former employers used a similar defence for a complaint to the Independent Press Standards Organisation about a newspaper column he wrote. The defence was that the column "could not be reasonably read as a serious, empirical, in-depth analysis of hard factual matters”.
That’s the long version of, “I was JOKING!”
I think they what she is trying to say is more like “Geez - I was just asking a question! I wasn’t saying it was true”, or some other such nonsense.
That and adding, smugly, “I guess I’m just more curious about things.”
Well you might “wonder,” but you never go and find out.