[kiliantics]

Any event occurring today has to be understood in the context of recent and often not-so-recent history. You can't make sense of what's happening in Ukraine without understanding what was going on during the Maidan protests in 2014. You can't understand BLM without going back at least to the 60s.

On top of this, you need to be aware of the tendencies in constructing media narratives and assess whether they are showing in whatever you are reading. "Cui bono?" and all that. The techniques and patterns haven't changed much and you can read works by e.g. Chomsky to develop a critical sense for what you should look out for.

As others have said, follow the money. The Ukraine story is obviously not a simple good, handsome actor PM vs. evil, Soviet spy dictator. So why is it being painted this way? And what might the real story be? You want a media source that is providing historical context, ideally along with on the ground information from people who are engaged with events at a local level, and also does not hide its ideological position and motive in sharing the story. You won't have the full story after this obviously but it's better than narratives with unmotivated claims depending on cherry-picked sources and undisclosed financing.

I actually find that the far left media can usually provide the greatest insight into a situation, you just have to take the ideology with a grain of salt. They are advancing an agenda but don't try to hide it and their information comes from networks of people engaged in local communities and struggles and who follow relevant political and economic ties very closely. Here is a long interview with a Ukrainian anarchist that can give way more detail on the situation than any paid journalist could hope to:

https://crimethinc.com/2022/02/03/ukraine-between-two-fires-...