http://freeindependentsun.com/ Over two years ago I started my own website in order to promote good news, independent politics, and to generally help mankind. I'm trying to raise funds now to help keep my website going as I travel around the country promoting freedom and liberty, and all things good in nature. http://jaktober.chipin.com/the-free-independent-sun
I should mention an observation I've made. Titles normally include words and phrases that are the opposite of reality. People's Republics are rarely either a republic or the people's. Democrat, as in the Democrat Party, are never democratic. Free isn't, independent isn't. and so forth. How about just the Sun as a title and let people judge for themselves. For me, the Christian Science Monitor is one of the least biased newspapers in the country. I was shocked. Again, the name didn't reflect reality but in this case it was a good thing. Perhaps North Korea would be more free and have more concern for it's citizens if it were named The Kim Dictatorship. I went and looked. Bingo. Certainly not independent and free in the sense of free from peddling ideology is not in the cards, either.
The title is a creative use of generic periodic names. There are many "Sun" and "Independent" periodicals, usually with the city name before it. Free refers to the cost. It costs nothing. And it is Independent. I own it as a Sole-Proprietor. I like the Christian Science Monitor. One of my college Political Science professor had us read it regularly. The point of the website is to express a narrative. The narrative is, what is in my opinion (and the opinion of my contributors) useful causes, practices and information. It is biased. I've only done one interview through it, and it was for a socialist candidate for Mayor in Long Beach. I collect information for Ron Paul and Green Party candidates/campaigns to help activists. I also collect concepts, lots of Permaculture and Martial Arts. I report of technology and sciences that I think are interesting. The title was my attempt at creating a unique name out of generic terms. It was my attempt at being creative and formal at the same time. I do limit my content to positive articles. I have let some critical comments through, but only if they are constructively critical. I write a lot of editorial on the website, I am the editor, and don't have a lot of contributers (haven't had an outside article for months). I'm trying to get more reporting (check the Jeet Kune Do, Permaculture and Technology section for reporting).
I very much agree. There are many good quality articles about the issues that actually matter in the Christian Science Monitor. Yes, there is a small quantity of bias, but it is mostly only bias towards the life and religious values that Christian Science supports. Their articles have generally supported the notion of self-responsibility for ones economic circumstances (essentially saying that any hard working able-bodied man could pull himself out of homelessness), but have recently changed to the plight of the unemployed (and people who are involuntarily homeless since they have lost their houses. As for racial realism, the paper is still reluctant to discuss the actual conditions happening, but at least it does not avoid them entirely. It expresses concern over the civil liberties and living conditions of the undocumented, but also some concern about the effects of so much immigration. It is certainly not perfect, but most of the other media sources in the USA are trash, and for that reason I would recommend the Christian Science Monitor to those that want a more independant perspective on the events happening in the world.
