The Reliability of Information

According to some polls, only 6% of Americans trust the mainstream media. This survey was published in April 2016, and things seem to have gotten worse in that area with president Trump's comments about the media (labeling mainstream media organizations such as CNN as "fake news"). This has sparked a lot of discussion from alternative media outlets mainly found online (such as Reason TV/Magazine, various YouTube commentators, etc), many people preferring direct footage of events over press coverage at this time.

The role of the press, in my opinion, should be to inform the people so that they can make educated decisions at the ballot box. However, a quick Google search will reveal that most articles only require a couple of hours of study before they are published -- and often times it's online research, rather than on-the-ground journalism. The press has taken to character assassinations (see: PewDiePie) and entertaining radical claims for the purpose of traffic. After all, more viewers means more money. But the prevalence of internet usage (e.g. using tweets as sources ) has led to a strange situation, where the press is filled with misinformation and reports on it as if it were fact, while legitimate news is pushed aside for the sake of political partisanship .

While the president's opinions on the press are decidedly radical and are criticized heavily , I think it is important to question the reliability of sources which are often assumed to be reliable. After all, as Jim Morrison said, "Whoever controls the media, controls the mind." Frankly, the goal of the press now seems to be locked in hyperbole in the search for more money rather than the legitimate dissemination of unbiased information to the public.

How reliable is the information that we are given? What propaganda is present within it? And, if our sources are unreliable, how are we to make an educated decision on anything of any major importance? Also, to what extent are other sources to be trusted? Infowars, for example, is often entirely ignored as a legitimate news source (while there exists direct video evidence for their claims, such as the article on CNN linked earlier). The New York Times is often credited as a reliable resource, but for some reason they felt the need to rededicate themselves to honest reporting , suggesting that their reporting had been dishonest.

If this is an issue, as the majority of Americans believe it is based on the polls, then how can we (as Jedi, as citizens, or just as consumers) solve it? Would a boycott of unreliable media outlets even be feasible at this point?

Every news agency is going to spin the story they tell to steer it towards their philosophy. The trick is to read the same story from different agencies to see the common ground. If you generally get your news from CNN, try reading the same story at Fox News and see the difference, and what points are the same. Then go to BBC, NPR, and even RT (Russia Today) and see how they spin it.

Wait, you mean Reddit lied to me?


I can't speak for anyone else (obviously) and doubly less so (eh?) for anyone in other lands (doubly obviously?)


It's generally been assumed around my house that if it ain't on ABC, it's probably a crock, (and if it is on ABC, there's still a 50% chance it's a crock)

I don't remember the last time I read a newspaper that was worth the paper it's printed on.

anyway, fun show -

https://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/




(uh, the A in ABC is for Australia...)



Edit: Worth noting that whatever the spin, the ABC still needs viewers to keep funded, so they still get sucked into the same bloody pointless stories as the other outlets rather than flat out ignore them and focus on important news.

What to do about it, eh? Good question. Alternative media is the answer, in my opinion. Decisions are made on a corporate scale based upon income. The almighty dollar. If we show them we will not stand for the biased, poorly researched, occasionally aggressive without reason style of "news" they seek to provide by denying views, cancelling subscriptions, supporting alternatives and encouraging others to do the same, progress may be made on the mainstream front. However, a side issue is confirmation bias. People will believe what they want to about Trump, or PewDiePie, or Milo, etc. This trend allows the media to get away with blatant libel and be rewarded for it. Political rivals are the most likely to be offended enough to depart.

Personally, I watch Sargon of Akkad and try to spend a few hours researching topics of interest to me to understand all facets with no bias other than my own.

While the income of the news agencies are still dependent on ratings and the # of viewers watching, they will always show things they can show, in ways they can show them, that will continue to keep or improve ratings and the numbers of viewers. Until that comes to a stop, it will not change. That's just my personal opinion though.

Yea they are selling a product, it is not accurate information but a packaged experience for a target audience. Ya gotta take it for what it is, find what you need from it. Truth can be found in various amounts pretty much anywhere, even if its indirectly. It just happens to be that the content is informational in its nature, and so we'd prefer it if it was informative to us - but that will always be based on what we already know - which is impossible. So the best we can probably ask for happens to be the same thing which used to define professionalism in journalism! It's probably a reflection on the audiences more then the media though.

in addition to the disingenuousness and in many cases outright bias of established media, todays abundance of unregulated and totally unreliable social media coupled especially with the use of internet history to produce search results makes it way too easy to stay in the echo chamber - actually it makes it very difficult to get out of the echo chamber

randomblogspot.com is not a legitimate journalistic source and its a very small percentage of bloggers who i would consider legitimate journalists

there is a virtually endless number of "sources" right now that will convince you that the earth is flat, that dinosaurs never lived, and that human civilization is under the control of carnivorous lizard men from another dimension

whatever opinion or idea you have in your head, a simple web search will confirm that youre right, even when youre totally wrong

The reality of tools are you can hurt or harm without training or guidance. To me information is a tool much like a sword. My 3 yo is smart . He's being groomed, yet will I give him the sword? Nob for a while and even he has to portray some form of sense. Responsibility and character can tell on that . Same as info , the dude , we have now as humans the access to find any ANY every EVERY bitt of information thanks to the net. The reality is what are we doing with it ! The old saying , some folks cut off their nose just to spite their face comes to mind .
Find your own focus and build ! Don't worry about THEM too much lol do you , what would you do dude if in reality you stared at my library , would you learn or not? That would be your choice , as is ours every day we log into the net or read a book, what do we do with it ?
Personally I don't look to the net for info . Well how do you you find out everything .... Lol laugh OUT loud , I don't , MY focus is closer than further and more touchable than in reachable . Aka right in front of me . So to each their own . What do you do with it ? Most sadly make a meme . Difrences are in the action of use . Hope that helps a bit , pm box is always open .
I am rarely Ill informed , but that's actively my own choice . No matter what the world says , today my home is warm and cozy and there's a bit of tea and cake some where. And if your near come on in and warm your bones..... Won't find that at msn dot com and won't find extra chairs and uno ...( I said uno ! ) as handy as the tea! My choice , our choice every day. My thought is be aware not attached . May the Living Force be with y'all! Every where you look for it !

I once fell for a social media "news" story about a solar storm that would cause the sky to be considerably darker for 9 straight days. Ever since then I have been pretty skeptical of everything I read online. My theory is to read as many sources as possible and take only the commonalities as facts. I have a list of sources which I deem mostly reliable and check them all before making an opinion. Within reason of course. I don't have time to fact check every little thing I see, just any one that I plan to discussing later or actually care much about.