So what happened to Sara since last year? Russia Today biased? ‘Facts are my religion’, says London reporter Sudden epiphany?

Reminds me of this, it's such a show regardless of her intentions.

RT is popular -- that's what I essentially said -- Sara won't change that. Pretty sure as credible as any other major media outlet.

Certainly better than current day Ukrainian news :D This fake-o-machine beats everything in anti-rating of credibility.

In that article she said this:

“Facts are my religion,” she says. “When it comes to covering a story if anyone asked me to alter or drop something I’d be out. I wouldn’t think twice about it.”

And now she's out... sounds about right

Anyway, I wasn't arguing their popularity, rather their credibility. Based on what I've seen and read from them, their about as credible as the UK's Daily Mail (not a lot). Find something that fits the company line and ignore everything else. Not all news outlets are that bad although they all skew things to differing degrees.

Neither story (Ukrainian side, pro-Russian side) is fact right now, so she's overreacting.

They're biased, like any other major media, if you think otherwise you're naive. Lack of credibility is, say, reprinting fake news. Want some fake news? Go to UNIAN ("bitch" entirely owned by Mr.Kolomoisky).

UPD: Speaking about Daily Mail :D

Like I said, find something that follows the company line and ignore everything else. The lack of credibility is in not checking or verifying sources or ignoring information/data that doesn't fit their line.

All media does this to some degree, but the more credible news outlets will do their own investigations and present all the data (with some language based spin of course). From what I've seen of RT, they're at the lower end of the credibility scale.

Don't know much about UNIAN, as far as I can tell from that link, they don't have much in the way of substance.

And who is on higher end of that scale?

For me it varies with time, just when you think you've found a decent news outlet they publish an idiotic article. That said, The Guardian (UK) are up there at the moment for the Edward Snowden leaks, some of the investigative journalism pieces they've written in the past and the generally solid presentation of science articles (that few newspapers get right without sounding sensationalist). They do present are rather left leaning view though, so it's best to keep that in mind when reading their articles.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk

And for you?

Guardian

Washington Post

Le Monde (printed)

Der Spiegel

El Pais

That is probably the best journalism you can refer too, and it's been like that for a while.

Russia has no equivalent of investigative journalism. They are even given official spins to be applied ffs...

http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140128/186989859/Russian-State-TV-Fires-Social-Media-Staff-Over-Nazi-Quote.html

MOSCOW, January 28 (RIA Novosti) – In a second Nazism-related media scandal in two days, a Russian state television channel fired all its social media staff after a quote by fascist ideologue Joseph Goebbels was used in a Facebook photo album.

The Kremlin-controlled Vesti-24 news channel on Monday put up a collection of illustrated quotes about Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin to mark the 90th anniversary of his death this month.

Along with Mahatma Gandhi, Winston Churchill and Albert Einstein, the list included Lenin’s successor, Josef Stalin, as well as Goebbels.

The Third Reich’s Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda was cited as praising Lenin for “leading [the Russian people] from suffering” and to freedom.

Goebbels was dropped from the list of “great men” after backlash on Facebook mounted on Tuesday night.

The entire social media desk of the VGTRK media holding, which owns the channel, was sacked over the incident, Vesti.ru said on its Facebook page Tuesday.

The Stalin quote remained in place.

Ironically, the conservative VGTRK faced the same criticism of whitewashing Nazism as the ultraliberal online television Dozhd just a day previously.

Dozhd had to apologize and take down an online poll asking whether the Soviet Union should have surrendered Leningrad to the Nazis to avoid the death of 1.5 million people in the brutal siege of 1941-1944.

I don't rely on established media outlets for the events I follow, including RT. My sources of information are informal and usually heavily biased one way or another, so I got used to the fact I have to rely on unreliable. Say, for Ukrainian events aside for a couple guys on the ground that feed me with some news, there're streamers, there're limited number of popular actors involved in the events like Strelkov (DPR commander-in-chief), Tymchuk (claim to be Ukrainian field commander, de-facto he is one of maaany unofficial spokepersons), Semchenko (Ukrainian filed commander of paramilitary battalion), there're Ostrovsky's of VICE news despite his heavy anti-Russian bias (follow him since Crimea events), there's ANNA-news on anything war related (follow them since Syrian events), in that regard they are the best because they are always on the fronline quite literally, local news etc.

Can't say anything bad about Guardian, even though immediatelly was able to find this f*ck up:

The alleged Vkontakte page of Igor Strelkov, "patriot" and leader of the pro-Russian army in Donetsk, bragged that the DPR’s army shot down a Ukrainian AN-26 aircraft about a half hour after the tragedy.

This is exactly what I've said -- a fake reprint, he never claimed that. More here -- took me 10 min to check that.

Or this -- this guy said that, that guy said this and another guy said anything different -- nothing fakish here, and nice of them to report all opinions, but tastes like a distilled water. Guardian is practically non-factor for me, I come across John Pilger's article in Guradian on Odessa events once, but that's solely due to reputation of the author.

Guardian is useless to me. Following yours -- "will do their own investigations and present all the data" -- I'm not sure what kind of "investigation" and "data" they could provide me with if afair they don't have their reporters on place and have to rely on others.