App Profile: SITREP

Clayton Luk

Rating: 4/5

Summaries are great and gets info you might not see too easily elsewhere. Some product updates that would be great: 1. Have a ‘feed’ similar to Twitter/X that has its own dedicated tab. The map tab is nice, but I know where the countries are, so I don’t want to give up 40% of the screen to the map. 2. Have a Daily Briefing tab. This would be a tab with each country listed in your watchlist with a link to its daily briefing. 3. Make it so the entire summary/BLUF fits on the map/feed item. Right now you can read most of it but have to click into each one to see the whole sentence.

DMOGSLNJ

Rating: 5/5

I rarely rate news apps, let alone write a review, but in this instance, I must break that rule I have to write this. As a news-junkie of multiple decades, I’ve had every news app, paid and free, as well as subscriptions to NYT, Washington Post, WSJ, as well as Ground News and every news platform right, left and center. Why? Because getting a “straight” news article is next to impossible when it comes to geopolitical affairs. That is where SITREP really shines! No fluff, no bias, no slant, no spin! The best part is SITREP gives you EXACTLY what you need to be an informed news consumer: Who, What, When, Where, Why PLUS a brief analysis of why they published the info. Better still, they DO provide the citations for who broke a news item or claimed it. Add to that you can set up countries that you want items from, plus “confidence levels” (low, medium, high) as to how reliable a story likely is… and you can filter that way, as well as set up notifications for levels. I used SITREP for less than 30 minutes and immediately set up a Pro level account for $9.99 … well worth every penny!!! Do it. You won’t regret it. And they are constantly updating the app! Bonus!

jdwa18375

Rating: 2/5

This initially helped us see everything going on worldwide, putting the information we needed all in one place so we could prioritize events for discussion, but In the SITREP reports, we received frequent inaccuracies, some small, some large (such as referring to certain well known government officials by incorrect title or position on more than one occasion). Additionally, my group (consisting of Democrats and Republicans alike) seemed to agree, the information we were receiving tended to have a significant amount of political bias, both in the information provided and analysis. We could care less if you lean left or right. We rely on facts and information only. We don’t care about politics or agendas. This was an interesting concept but it seems to have missed the mark. Subscription cancelled.