Ground News

Three sources that are likely to give me different perspectives.

Now, if I had more time, and there are actually sources online, like one of them called, I think, Ground News, where they will tell you, okay, here's what different people, different points of view are saying about this.

Because you get a broader perspective.

At the same time as I'm avoiding polluting my mind by being exposed to stuff that isn't quality stuff, I'm also trying to do mind expansion in which I go out and look for people who are going to tell me things I don't want to hear.

Kagi is a subscription product, and that changes what it's allowed to show you.

What else? Ground News does something different and useful.

It takes a story and shows you how different outlets covered it side-by-side with a breakdown of the political lean of the coverage.

That's not a weird story tool.

Give me the stack.

Coggy News for the tunable daily mix.

Ground news when a story matters and he wants to see the spread.

1440 or a similar newsletter as the Morning Habit Replacement.

But we should have a spectrum of information available to us that we can consume and we can make a decision on what seems to be credible.

That's why things like Arrow News or Ground News that give you like a rating on how left or right leaning something is or even comparative headlines on the same issue.

So they'll show you like, I don't know.

sort of read anything without reading maybe a counterpiece or trying to get more context because there's two sides to every story.

Then if it says it's believable, then I'm, I'm trying to read more of the articles from the source.

I'm trying to basically see, okay, what do I think here? Do I believe that this is a legitimate source? Do I not believe that this is a legitimate source? I then use tools like Ground News to kind of see, uh, they, for many of these sources, not for all of them, but for many of these sources it will mark, this, this tool Ground News will, will basically tell you what, uh, where its media bias, uh, ranks.

And-

Wow

A majority of the so-called justices blocked.

Thomas and Alito dissented, according to Ground News I read.

All right? They blocked the procedure that would have allowed the US Postal Service to withhold potentially millions of mail-in ballots to the lemmings who vote our country off the cliff, right? Terrible.

Um, the court offered little explanation in its order, but said the administration was unlikely to succeed in defending the new requirements, which our greatest President Trump says are needed to curb voter fraud.