Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But the whole thing left me with this question – how do people choose sources they trust.
How do we find them?
It's actually a lot simpler than you think. In American politics, there is:
(1) the echo chamber of the left, and
(2) the echo chamber of the right.
95% of Americans believe in one of the two - as evidenced by the percentage of people who voted for either Hillary or Trump.
You just have to choose between these two or some middle ground between them. All other political beliefs have very little relevance in American society. They are essentially losing propositions.
Ok, we're going somewhere with this. Let's say you hear two opposed versions of an event listening to the multiple sources you mentioned. Like the example I gave above. And I'm trying to avoid anything related to left/right, Trump/antiTrump bcs it leads us nowhere. I tried to use common sense and logic - how would people (the other side) behave? Who profits from this? What's in it for them? What are the risks? I try to use what I know about psychology, history, sociology (not an expert either, but still know something). This is basically what I do whether I'm trying to choose my sources or assess an event or events myself. What do you do?
I actually watch international news sources (knowing they are from the get go on the liberal side and they all do have cultural and national slants). They do tend to be less propaganda than the US news version IMO; they see what they see through their cultural lens, and mid america or deep south american is not in their 'cognitive domain'. French24 news interviewers are particularly tough for example even if their belief system is X; the guest must make the case why X is correct or explain Y.
So knowing that they don't get it/us, if the same news nugget makes its way through hong kong to french news service; then I am curious to consider it.
george carlin: anyone who drives slower than you is a moron, anyone who drives faster is a maniac.
i think the same applies to politics in trying to hunt down a "moderate".
Not very helpful.
It seems like being "moderate," for many people here, is not aligning with any one party. I would think you could have a rather extreme view of an issue without necessarily being partisan.
It seems like being "moderate," for many people here, is not aligning with any one party. I would think you could have a rather extreme view of an issue without necessarily being partisan.
And there's the problem. Not being blindly partisan in and of itself, is considered an "extreme view". With a populist like Donald Trump you HAVE to be blindly partisan, it's the only way to go forward with your support of the man. When's the last time you read any coherent defense of Trump, that didn't include a strawman argument, an ad hominem attack or a deflection?
It doesn't help that there are people out there like Rush Limbaugh " I'm sure the left as someone too."
who pushes their agenda as well. Alex Jones. Isn't he left? People listen to these type of radio/TV personalities and they are in someone's pocket every bit as our politicians. IMO, people tend to let hate decide for them not logic or reason.
I actually watch international news sources (knowing they are from the get go on the liberal side and they all do have cultural and national slants). They do tend to be less propaganda than the US news version IMO; they see what they see through their cultural lens, and mid america or deep south american is not in their 'cognitive domain'. French24 news interviewers are particularly tough for example even if their belief system is X; the guest must make the case why X is correct or explain Y.
Television is more likely to leave you less informed than print media. That's part of the problem. Boomers are a generation raised in front of the television and still consume more television media than all other generations.
With a populist like Donald Trump you HAVE to be blindly partisan, it's the only way to go forward with your support of the man.
It's the same way with Hillary. Most of her supporters were unconditionally, blindly partisan. That includes all of the mainstream liberal news media.
That's the way it works in American politics. Pick one echo chamber or the other. It's not that complicated. I repeat - 95% of Americans voted for either Hillary or Trump. How much simpler can you get than that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People listen to these type of radio/TV personalities and they are in someone's pocket every bit as our politicians. IMO, people tend to let hate decide for them not logic or reason. 
