How much do you trust your news source?
Sure, your newspapers and stations are owned by rich dudes with agendas, and all independent organizations have their purposes as well (and don't even get me started on those garbage propaganda emails, oy), but the REAL misinformation in the media is your own internal bias. YOU WILL FIND WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR! Think about that. Your preconceptions dictate what you find to be credible. Questioning yourself, and finding REAL credible sources for things you already believe is the hardest part of research, but is the only way to really know anything is true.
For instance, I know I listen to more liberal outlets, and every now and then some things sound fishy. Recently the liberal media has been attacking Rand Paul, mostly for being the TEA Party's first major success in the primaries. When I heard he was against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, of course I was skeptical. I checked it out, watched the videos (his words exactly), and turns out the man is NOT a racist, he's just a laissez faire Libertarian who's not used to getting grilled on national television. He believes private businesses should have the right to deny service to whomever they choose, should have no affirmative action, no mandatory wheel chair accessibility, and probably believes in monopolies too. Doesn't make him a bigot, makes him a very backwards economist.
The point is, we're all predisposed to think opposition news is garbage and needs to be fact checked, but how many of you check the things that you're predisposed to thinking is credible? Work on that.
~Yasu
"If you're young and have a heart you're a liberal. If you're older and have a brain in your head you'll be a conservative." ~My very wealthy real estate agent
4 comments:
WORD.
BUT...what the hell is with this underground electric fence to secure the border idea? (from his own website) I'd say that's gnawing on the door of bigotry.
haha, ya know, I'm really not that against an electric fence. As long as it is VERY well publicized and everyone knows that it's there. There are certain borders (eg: the DMZ in Korea, fences around prisons, electric fences in Jurassic Park) that are taken more seriously than others. Should we consider implementing one? I don't think it's worth the cost, and largely believe that the anti-immigration movement is an old nativist technique of designating a scapegoat.
Haha, turns out the wikipedia description for Nativism includes the note, "In scholarly studies "nativism" is a standard technical term. However, in public political discourse "nativist" is a term of opprobrium usually used by the opposition, and rarely by nativists themselves (they call themselves "patriots.")."
How about that.
Post a Comment