I don't really watch the TV, by which I mean my eyes tend to be elswehere when it's on, so most of my entertainment comes from books, net articles, audiobooks and radio. For audio-only I can do other things without missing anything, TV you really do miss stuff if you're only listening and glancing. I mostly just like to have some sort of background noise at all times too.



Depends on what you mean by 'fair', a lot of people think 'critical' is anti-thetical to 'fair', whereas I consider them synonmous. However I don't consider 'critical' synonmous with hyperbole, mudslinging, BS emotional arguments, etc. In this regard, I'd say most of my news sources are fairly fair.



Both, in terms of outright partisan slant, I happen to enjoy listening to Rush, Miller, and NPR... the first two are very entertaining, the latter is always on and holds to my idea of fair news outlet even if they are nearly as slanted as Rush. It's important to get both sides, and kind of a waste of time and energy hunting for unslanted news. I make a point of getting my leftist take on things from writers or hosts who tend to be drier and analysis oriented to avoid getting ticked off at slurs directed against my own side, but I still get it. Obviously I don't care about slurs directed at the otherside since those don't distract me and I often find them funny. You'll get as much news listening to Rush, if you're right wing, as anything else, because he covers it all, usually just quoting the whole thing, and you're not getting distracted by being ticked at him, I assume the same is true for leftist radio or blog.



This is about the only place I actually discuss politics, but I post on other forums that interest me, I just happen to like the direct reply format we have here.



I do read comments on other sites, I just rarely leave any, and when I do it's stuff like "Correction, X is the co-director of Y, not it's owner" or "They are based out State of CAlifornia, not the State of San Diego" but I do like the comments because barring the majority of pointless or nasty comments, much like the discussion page on a wiki article, you tend to get a good counterpoint or support on the spot. On any controversial issue, the wiki is very watered down, where as the discussion page has all the stuff and people's arguments over veracity and appropriateness, which is usually more useful.