Back to Top 2012 Most Trustworthy News Sources

· Editorial & Opinion (pro 23:23) · 44 Comments

Trustworthy News SourcesFinding fair and trustworthy news sources is difficult despite the fact that more news outlets exist today than ever before. In light of this, has created a list containing those news sources who have upheld a commitment to excellence.

Each news source is carefully considered and ranked by the following criteria:

  1. Reliability: Consistent, regularly updated delivery of news.
  2. Accuracy: Well-rounded stories which focus upon facts rather than gossip or hearsay.
  3. Quality: Favors informative, well-written pieces over sheer quantity.
  4. Balance: Stories are selected and reported aside from bias or agenda.
  5. Reach: Strong authority and readership across the web.

Without further delay, here are the selected news sources for 2012:

1. Drudge Report

Drudge Report: Trustworthy News Sources

Though Drudge doesn’t often produce exclusive content, it still stands as the most reliable news source on the web. With a reach and readership higher than that of the New York Times, Drudge Report is the top-trusted news site for millions of individuals around the globe. Readers and reporters alike have come to depend upon Drudge’s quick, up-to-the-minute reporting of news.

2. World Net Daily

World Net Daily: Trustworthy News Sources

With a continual commitment to the truth and top-notch journalistic practices, World Net Daily has time and again exposed corruption in the media and politics while maintaining good journalistic practices.

WND clearly differentiates when they’re reporting news and providing commentary or opinion.

3. TheBlaze

TheBlaze: Trustworthy News Sources

Compared to the others on this list, TheBlaze is a relatively new news source. Yet in a short time, it’s gained a solid reputation and has even been referred to as “The Huffington Post for conservatives.”

TheBlaze mixes breaking news with opinion and entertainment.

4. Breitbart News

Breitbart News: Trustworthy News Sources

Founded by the late Andrew Breitbart, Breitbart news has become a trusted resource by many for current events. With a central focus on political issues, Breitbart maintains a worthy news source by continually reporting stories and facts many news sites elect to omit.

5. Fox News

Fox News: Trustworthy News Sources

Despite much opposition from mainstream media sites, Fox News has made a noticeable effort to keep news fair and balanced. As with others on this list, Fox News continues to uphold a commitment to excellence with fair editorial and journalistic standards.

6. NewsBusters

NewsBusters: Trustworthy News Sources

As if the name didn’t provide the site’s purpose well enough, NewsBusters has done an excellent job not only exposing corruption in the media, but also consistently covering stories relevant to our nation.

7. The Weekly Standard

Weekly Standard: Trustworthy News Sources

Accompanied by a well-established print edition, The Weekly Standard offers insight and commentary into the latest news. Updated daily, The Weekly Standard covers relevant, important topics from around the globe.

8. Wall Street Journal

Wall Street Journal: Trustworthy News Sources

While the Wall Street Journal reports on a wide variety of topics, its business new rivals the best nation and worldwide. Millions have come to rely upon WSJ for their authority on stocks, trade, and news across the globe.

What’s Your Most Trustworthy News Sources?

Feel free to leave a comment to let us know which news source you’ve found most up-to-date with staying informed.

  • mntx

    World Net Daily? Are you kidding? The others make sense but that is tabloid trash.

    • AL

      mntx And who appointed you judge and jury?
      Or do you actually have even one example exemplifying your comment?


        AL, Give mntx a break. He has every right to call attention to his ignorance. I’m just guessing from his comments that he must be one of the “low information” people that voted for O

    • Ron Mar

      You need to know and remember the “tabloid trash” that stayed after the John Edwards baby daddy, love child story until other media finally started reporting it. That “tabloid trash” was the National Enquirer.

      • Bighoss

        Well, even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then.

  • Lucy

    WND is sensationalist but prints true stories other media don’t dare touch. It’s a gutsy news source.

  • Terry K.

    Sorry, WorldNetDaily does not engage in “good journalistic practices.” For instance, it has repeatedly refused to report evidence that President Obama’s birth certificate is real and Joe Arpaio’s “cold case posse” investigation into the issue was heavily biased, incomplete and factually flawed. Details here.

    Further, WND’s “news” reporting is replete with bias and opinion, often telling only one side of a story and failing to give targets an opportunity to respond. WND has no “commitment to the truth,” as it frequently publishes misinformation or outright falsehoods, a policy that comes straight from editor Joseph Farah. Details here.

    I would be happy to provide more examples if needed. I request that you reconsider giving any sort of award honoring WND because the record simply does not justify it.

    • Christopher Collins

      I would be more than happy if Obama presented everything including his college records as well, Terry. Why has it been hidden?

      WND has been on everything other liberal news hacks won’t touch because Obama is their Anointed One.

      • Helena

        He was president of Law review at Harvard, a post given to the most academically gifted student in the class. Are your college transcripts (assuming you have any) posted on-line?

        More generally, at least 3 of the sites mentioned on the list above are not news sources at all but purveyors of weird right-wing conspiracy theories. If you ask for proof, just go look at their front pages right now. The most reliable news outlets are the NYT, NPR, and MSNBC.

      • S.L. Manning

        I would like to see Matt Drudge’s birth certificate and college records. Why has he been hiding them? is he afraid that we will see that he is not American and that he flunked out of junior college? Just like Glen Beck?

      • Swisslady

        I agree! Mike Zullo and Sheriff Joe have the truth on Obama. As a genealogist I have done plenty of research on Obama and came up with the same findings.
        If the truth had been published Obama would never never have become president. He is out to destroy America. Believe it!

      • Bill


    • josie

      Terry K, you seem unable to recognize facts regarding the phony BC. By “sealing” his records, Barry has spit in the faces of the American people, thinking he is much more important than any other President has been. Reel yourself in, he’s a common man, and he works for you and me….basically, an Employee, nothing more. Don’t elevate him, he’s a jive-talkin’ phony.

      • Wharrgarbl

        Wow, my comment got moderated into oblivion, but overt racism like “jive-talkin’ phony” is a-okay?

        I see what kind of publication is being run here, and it’s not Christian.

      • Rev Cocoa

        I’m curious, Josie, whether you took as great offense at the fact that Romney didn’t release his tax returns– not that those things are necessarily equivalents. After all, there’s not much of a precedent for releasing school records. (Bush didn’t release his. They were leaked.) It’s not expected that presidents do so. Mitt Romney’s father, however, set a precedent regarding tax returns when you’re running for president. Basically every presidential candidate since has released about a decade’s worth– Romney being a glaring exception.

        The other distinction is relevance. While one’s college years are certainly formative, these transcripts are going on thirty years old. It’s hard to know what exactly could be gleaned from them. If someone were interested in getting to know me, I’m not sure at what point I’d think to whip out the college transcripts.

        If Romney were to follow precedent and release a decade’s worth of tax returns, well, now, that might tell us something worth knowing. After all, he is someone who had said that he knows how to get the economy going. It’d be interesting to know how he handles his own finances. In 2008, we went underwent a huge fiscal meltdown in this country. It’d be interesting to know how Romney weathered that, whether he, like so many of us, took a significant hit. And, if not, how he managed to avoid it.

        One other difference between the two. While lots of people suspect Obama of hiding secrets in those mysterious transcripts, that’s just their suspicions. With Romney, there is a precedent for misinforming. He said to “trust him” when he ran for governor that he’d filed as a resident of MA. He hadn’t.

      • David M.Price

        His treachery is unlimited and unbridled. He was put in place by our adversaries to destroy our Nation. Obvious by his works as president.
        Constitutional Law “is” the answer.
        Impeach Nobama!

    • Bill

      You are absolutely right Terry. The whole list is suspect especially brietbart. With all the trolling they do. I take it your town then is a right wing town as all those news agencies are tilted to the right. This whole site seems suspect to me.

  • Will


    Your ‘source’ works for Media Matters and I am supposed to believe that they are independent and unbiased?? Really?? Without being rude I really am beginning to think liberalism/progressiveism is a mental disorder! Love abortion, hate capital punishment, endorse sodomy (the primary vector for HIV) and extreme generosity with OTHER peoples money…

    • Terry K.

      If I’m wrong, you should be able to prove it, right? It’s beyond debate that WND engages in deceptive and false journalism and is not deserving of being called “trustworthy.”

      • Lawrence Evans

        Dear Terry,
        Again you’ve got it backwards; in America our standard is “Innocent Till Proven Guilty” so the onus is on YOU to prove your point.
        However, (and Terry this is in no way meant to be offensive to you, it’s just the illustration that came to mind); to the “rest” of you, there are some people who just cannot SEE the bigger picture and trying to educate them is a futile as trying to teach a pig to sing: “it’s a waste of time and it annoys the pig”.
        Perhaps the Buddhist Proverb applies here: “When the student is ready, the teacher will appear”

      • cgregor

        TerryK, you can’t make a man understand when he is being paid to not understand.– Upton Sinclair.

        Nice attempt to bring fairness and balance to this piece, though!

  • pragmatist

    I looked for criteria or data backing upo these rankings. I couldn’t find any. In Bubble World, the value of a news organization is apparently based on feelings too.

  • rickster

    i like how posters call those that bring attention to the fact that the sites listed are anything but top notch news sources ignorant. the readers of this rag are evidently a bunch of birther nut jobs who should probably be seeking some mental health care or a higher dosage of their meds.

  • Michael

    How many of those news sites predicted an Obama victory in 2012 ?

    • T. Williams

      Greetings Michael,

      You bring up a very good point, a very correct point actually.
      I have a question for you if you don’t mind answering.
      In no way is it a trick question, am really curious.
      Why do you think Obama won the election?

      Thanks for your time,
      T. Williams

      • Rev Cocoa

        There’s lots of ways to answer that question. But I’d argue that the underlying problem is Fox News. Fox News has a fiercely loyal and relatively large audience. A Republican could not win the primary without winning over that audience. Romney did eventually. The problem however is that that audience, while large relative to the audiences for MSNBC or CNN, does not represent the political views of the majority of the country. Romney won over Fox viewers but that was about it– until the first debate in which, among other things, Romney presented a much more moderate version of himself. But even his success there only resulted in a small bump in the polls. The idea that there was ongoing momentum until Sandy hit is not borne out by the data. He never really had a chance.

      • T. Williams

        Greetings Rev. Cocoa,

        Thanks for responding and your point is clearly laid out.
        Is there any one issue you think drove individuals to vote for Obama?
        If so would appreciate reading your comments.

        By the way, is “rev” an official title for you?

        Again, thanks,
        T. Williams

      • Rev Cocoa

        Question #1:
        No, at least not that I’ve come across.

        Question #2:
        Yes (and actually I should be working on my sermon).

      • T. Williams

        Greetings Rev Cocoa,

        Got it.

        Peace be with you,
        T. Williams

      • http://na justdooit

        Those who put down great news sources remind me of something Reagan once said. “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant, it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

        Nothing personal Terry K. and others in Obama’s tank.

      • Rev Cocoa

        Really, Mr. Dooit? I’d be interested in hearing what exactly in my comments “isn’t so.” Read this article, in which Mr. Farah admits to publishing much that “isn’t so.”

  • Zoomie

    This is really from The Onion, right?

    Has to be! If I was making a list of the most UNRELIABILE “news” sites, every one of these would make the top-ten list!

  • bobv

    Terry and the other complainers about WND above have reason to be concerned…because as Lucy points out, while WND can be a bit sensationalist, it is effective and generally right on. The left wing news has all their facts right for the ‘other side’? Ha ha, Terry, you conveniently overlook the bias and lies of your news sources…which are horridly full of baloney. They make WND look like Jesus Christ, as far as telling the truth. Can see why WND makes you nervous…they’re generally right on and tell it with fight and spunk, not afraid to get the truth out there. Wouldn’t you like to shut them up, huh, Terry. Sure…but they’re also smart enough not to back down to whining from your side. Am very thankful for WND for getting the truth out there, and not backing down!!!

    • Garth Hagerman

      As a representative of all liberals everywhere, I can assure you WND does not make us nervous. We do not regard WND as a news site at all. It is a comedy site. It is no less ridiculous than The Onion.

    • Rev Cocoa

      I’m curious whether you could come up with as egregious an example of misinformation in the mainstream media as are found pretty regularly at WND.
      1. Claiming that Obama was photoshopped into a picture with his grandparents when he’d actually been photoshopped out the picture by someone at WND.
      2. Same link references the claim made by WND that Obama’s lawyers had spent 2 mil defending lawsuits regarding his birth certificate. (Not to mention all the other birther nonsense.)
      3. Suggesting that Sandy Hook was staged.

  • Alda Mershon

    This is a topic that’s close to my heart… Many thanks! Where are your contact details though?|

  • John v

    After years of reading WND I have not found anything not true. If you bash them give a reason why or go away.

  • Bobby


  • JR

    I trust TMZ as a news outlet more than MSNBC.

  • Asker

    I like msnbc, they tend to be correct but I don’t care for much of their other articles though. I’m more interested in what happens in the world than what happens in just one celebrity’s life

    • Swisslady

      MSNBC – correct? fair? I don’t agree.

    • Bighoss

      What chew talkin’ bout, Willis? MSNBC is not cluttered up with celebrity stuff by any means! You must have some other channel in mind.

  • Bighoss

    The article is mislabeled. It should be labeled “The Top Five Most Egregiously Deranged News Sources and a Few Others.”