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.
I have learned more history since becoming so into NPR...love their stories about certain people like the other day I learned a lot about Ronnie Reagan's life as a child, something I never knew and it's changed a lot of my thinking...on a person's beginnings and where they are today. He certainly was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
Maybe I'm just more aware in my older adult life, but years ago I do not recall observing so much resistance against traditional sources of news or facts. In our current climate, it seems to be an ever prevailing, and socially acceptable, attitude to discredit traditional sources of information. "Fake news", "flawed science", etc. are phrases that seem to be much more common today than when I was much younger. It used to be that fake news was easily detectable, and you could find them generally at "news stands" in the grocery check out line.
With so much doubt cast on our more traditional sources, I fear that many people will find it difficult to know what to believe in. Will they start honing in on the radical extremist who runs a podcast out of his grandmother's basement? What about those online "news" sites that run stories of the ever looming economic collapse that so many people used to chuckle at? A lot of conspiracy news sources seem to be drawing larger crowds, as people often cite InfoWars, Breitbart, or other hyper partisan sources as fact. Widely supported science has been deemed politically motivated and a danger to our way of life, amongst these crowds. NPR, AP, Reuters are considered too liberal or conservative, while previously ascertained partisan sources are embraced as neutral.
With all these skewed sources of information becoming more prevalent and widespread, while our traditional information sources face heavy attack and criticism, it raises the questions as to what do you choose to believe, and how do you come to that conclusion that your sources, while exponentially skewed from the norm, is indeed the correct source. How does one choose what to believe these days? Is it simply to choose what is most easiest to swallow? Or is there more of a logical, algorithmic process going on in one's mind?
I'd tell people this....
Most importantly keep an open mind. Go into it with knowing that probably 50% of data you intake is propaganda, maybe even more. Investigate alternative news sources including YouTube, RT, Al Jazeera, BBC. Analyze different outlooks no matter how bizarre they initially seem to you. Don't be closed to conspiracy theories and curiosities. There are seeds of truth everywhere. You can cherry pick the parts you intuitively feel are true from one outlook to another. Your gut feeling is always right.
what is relevant to a situation, and consistency. actual actions following up with words, not just hopeful claims.
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.
