“Christian” covers a lot of ground. That’s a fair description of the mainline Catholic viewpoint, but looking up a random Christian news source in the US could get you fiscal viewpoints ranging from lukewarm left to hardline right to more or less apolitical.
(It’s reliably socially conservative, though, generally speaking.)
That comes with some theological baggage, of course. You don’t want a news source that interprets everything in terms of the end times and looks forward to a nuclear war to annihilate the damned.
I’ve heard good things of the Christian Science Monitor (which obviously has even more questionable baggage), but I haven’t read it myself. Also Al Jazeera, which has other baggage (owned by a government), and which I also haven’t read.
I’ve heard good things of the Christian Science Monitor (which obviously has even more questionable baggage), but I haven’t read it myself.
Try reading it. Despite the name it doesn’t have an obvious Christian Science Bias. Although I’ve heard it is running into financial problems due to a principled refusal to resort to clickbait and fluff stories.
When I was in college, I took a class taught by the head of the polisci department—Cuba-loving socialist type—who had a habit of recommending it during lectures.
Sure, but all news sources come with some baggage—mostly ideological, sometimes theological, and often enough just batshit crazy. That’s why you don’t want a news source, you want lots of them.
Short name = Christian.
“Christian” covers a lot of ground. That’s a fair description of the mainline Catholic viewpoint, but looking up a random Christian news source in the US could get you fiscal viewpoints ranging from lukewarm left to hardline right to more or less apolitical.
(It’s reliably socially conservative, though, generally speaking.)
Depends on the church.
I honestly had not considered a Christian news option.
That comes with some theological baggage, of course. You don’t want a news source that interprets everything in terms of the end times and looks forward to a nuclear war to annihilate the damned.
I’ve heard good things of the Christian Science Monitor (which obviously has even more questionable baggage), but I haven’t read it myself. Also Al Jazeera, which has other baggage (owned by a government), and which I also haven’t read.
Try reading it. Despite the name it doesn’t have an obvious Christian Science Bias. Although I’ve heard it is running into financial problems due to a principled refusal to resort to clickbait and fluff stories.
CSM is very well-regarded.
When I was in college, I took a class taught by the head of the polisci department—Cuba-loving socialist type—who had a habit of recommending it during lectures.
Sure, but all news sources come with some baggage—mostly ideological, sometimes theological, and often enough just batshit crazy. That’s why you don’t want a news source, you want lots of them.