The largest study ever carried out on social media deactivation has found that disconnecting lowers users political participation and also their propensity to believe misinformation
How do you decide which sources are credible? I can’t decide. Literally everything can be faked, and the more there is on the line, the more incentive and resources there are to do so.
What important stuff do you think there is that isn’t faked? How do you decide that it’s not fake?
Damn near everything you’ve ever accepted as true is stuff you were told or read and just accepted it based on how it was presented.
I believe that some popular news organizations are sufficiently trustworthy. At the very least, you can find sources that rank higher than others on the scale of trustworthiness.
This is why, in a lot of universities, they’re trying to teach you how to learn, not necessarily how you should think.
We need to be able to examine the claims for ourselves and learn what red flags look like.
And a lot of the time we mix up “facts” with “opinions”. Even when we are looking at facts, most of the time there are lies mixed with truth or conveniently forgotten truths. If we only get our information from a single source, or from biased sources, then we’re going to miss some key information.
That’s why it’s good to make sure that you look at any story (especially politicized ones) from different angles and sources even if you don’t agree with them.
Not only that but it can be enlightening to hear about a story from someone who’s much more intimately familiar with the subject themselves.
For example, whenever it comes to news stories about the Supreme Court, I like to look for commentary from lawyers such as Steve Lehto or Legal Eagle. You’ll find that they typically provide some very important context into why a particular decision was made that cuts through a lot of the outrage material that reporters push for clicks.
Damn, you’re so enlightened.
How do you decide which sources are credible? I can’t decide. Literally everything can be faked, and the more there is on the line, the more incentive and resources there are to do so.
What important stuff do you think there is that isn’t faked? How do you decide that it’s not fake?
Damn near everything you’ve ever accepted as true is stuff you were told or read and just accepted it based on how it was presented.
Removed by mod
I believe that some popular news organizations are sufficiently trustworthy. At the very least, you can find sources that rank higher than others on the scale of trustworthiness.
This is why, in a lot of universities, they’re trying to teach you how to learn, not necessarily how you should think.
We need to be able to examine the claims for ourselves and learn what red flags look like.
And a lot of the time we mix up “facts” with “opinions”. Even when we are looking at facts, most of the time there are lies mixed with truth or conveniently forgotten truths. If we only get our information from a single source, or from biased sources, then we’re going to miss some key information.
That’s why it’s good to make sure that you look at any story (especially politicized ones) from different angles and sources even if you don’t agree with them.
Not only that but it can be enlightening to hear about a story from someone who’s much more intimately familiar with the subject themselves.
For example, whenever it comes to news stories about the Supreme Court, I like to look for commentary from lawyers such as Steve Lehto or Legal Eagle. You’ll find that they typically provide some very important context into why a particular decision was made that cuts through a lot of the outrage material that reporters push for clicks.