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.
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?
Last edited by Sir Quotes A Lot; 12-13-2018 at 02:46 PM..
That is a very troubling and very pertinent post. Personally, unless it is something URGENT (like a major earthquake in SoCal where some of my relatives live), if I want objective news, I go to the BBC website. Maybe that is not the best site, but it seems to be more objective than the U.S. outlets. (Again, I could be wrong about that.)
If there is a better way, I am certainly open to it!
That is a very troubling and very pertinent post. Personally, unless it is something URGENT (like a major earthquake in SoCal where some of my relatives live), if I want objective news, I go to the BBC website. Maybe that is not the best site, but it seems to be more objective than the U.S. outlets. (Again, I could be wrong about that.)
If there is a better way, I am certainly open to it!
I've started relying mostly on AP and Reuters for breaking news stories when I just want the facts, and NPR for some of the analysis (mostly from their podcasts). They tend to be the most neutral, as difficult as it may be at times, from my perspective. I've also had to cut out certain podcasts, like Pod Save America for instance. While I find them entertaining, and generally on point, they are very openly biased towards the left. And while I am very much aware of that, I also would find myself getting frustrated with our circumstances as a result of listening to their cynical and critical commentary on current affairs. So I said 'enough is enough', and unsubscribed from them, and instead picked up the 538 Politics podcast, which is more analytical and data driven.
Last edited by Sir Quotes A Lot; 12-13-2018 at 03:20 PM..
Real quick, one way is by looking at things around it and seeing if "things are adding up".
Take TWA 800 and the theory it was shot down by a USN missile. The indications around it, that for all the countries that don't like the US Navy sailing off their coast and they should have jumped at such a situation but they didn't, rather puts that theory into the dirt.
Got to run.
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.
