In case anyone sees this, if you’re going to a protest try to make it look good. Don’t go with fucking dog ears, and then talk to the media. I don’t care how good of a point you make. You’re making it about yourself at that point and people will ignore everything else and just talk about that.
Unless it’s change hands since last October, it’s owned by a billionaire Canadian family. It makes sense that they don’t care as much about showing this stuff.
Canadian multinational information conglomerate. The company was founded in Toronto, Ontario, Canada and maintains its headquarters at 19 Duncan Street there.
Thomson Reuters was created by the Thomson Corporation’s purchase of the British company Reuters Group on 17 April 2008. It is majority-owned by The Woodbridge Company (no info found), a holding company for the Thomson family of Canada.
◾ CEO is Steve Hasker
Steve assumed his role of President and Chief Executive Officer and a director of Thomson Reuters effective March 15, 2020. Previously, Steve served as Senior Adviser to TPG Capital, a private equity firm, Chief Executive Officer of CAA Global (which includes entities like CAA China, merchant bank Evolution Media and the incubator CAA Ventures), a TPG Capital portfolio company, and global president and chief operating officer of Nielsen, an information, data and measurement firm. Steve spent more than a decade with McKinsey as a partner in the global media, information and technology practice. Before joining McKinsey, Steve spent five years in several financial roles in the United States, Russia and Australia.
Steve started his career with PwC, where he qualified as a chartered accountant. He then received an MBA and master’s degree in international affairs from Columbia University. He grew up in Australia and during his career he has lived and worked across North America, Europe and Asia. Steve is also a non-executive director of Appen Limited and a member of the Australia and New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants.
Reuters, generally, will not censor truthful information. Some stuff won’t get picked up, but they make their money from subscriptions to financially relevant news and analysis, rather than shady payments for political influence. I honestly put them a step above AP most of the time, because money talks in geopolitics.
I honestly put them a step above AP most of the time, because money talks in geopolitics.
I 100% agree. 8 times out of 10 their articles are just the facts. Those 2 that aren’t though, yikes. Also, their headlines blow pretty hard sometimes too. The Guardian is probably 6 times out of 10 and those are the 2 of the 3 best IMO.
The editor of the AP makes the AP suck about half the time. They skew their headlines and their descriptive language sometimes in the actual article. They also hide a lot of the real news from their front page.
Propublica has been awesome for months now but are slightly going into the skewed headline territory. Mother Jones, even though when I checked on them last year they were ran by the best board, have been focusing on the puffed up articles. I’ve been sort of ignoring them lately.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/washington-dc-residents-protest-against-trumps-troop-deployment-city-2025-09-06/
In case anyone sees this, if you’re going to a protest try to make it look good. Don’t go with fucking dog ears, and then talk to the media. I don’t care how good of a point you make. You’re making it about yourself at that point and people will ignore everything else and just talk about that.
Unless it’s change hands since last October, it’s owned by a billionaire Canadian family. It makes sense that they don’t care as much about showing this stuff.
💲 Reuters
◾ Owned by the Thomson family, the wealthiest family in Canada.
◾ CEO is Steve Hasker
Source
Reuters, generally, will not censor truthful information. Some stuff won’t get picked up, but they make their money from subscriptions to financially relevant news and analysis, rather than shady payments for political influence. I honestly put them a step above AP most of the time, because money talks in geopolitics.
I 100% agree. 8 times out of 10 their articles are just the facts. Those 2 that aren’t though, yikes. Also, their headlines blow pretty hard sometimes too. The Guardian is probably 6 times out of 10 and those are the 2 of the 3 best IMO.
The editor of the AP makes the AP suck about half the time. They skew their headlines and their descriptive language sometimes in the actual article. They also hide a lot of the real news from their front page.
Propublica has been awesome for months now but are slightly going into the skewed headline territory. Mother Jones, even though when I checked on them last year they were ran by the best board, have been focusing on the puffed up articles. I’ve been sort of ignoring them lately.
I’m just happy that I saw some news on it instead of nothing