I have a pretty healthy relationship with what I call established sources. Some call them the MSM. So whenever I see something from elsewhere IE Youtube or something else. I automatically research the source and question it's reputation.
If I point out that the YouTube channel I have researched has videos about aliens and area 51 or sandy hook conspiracy videos all made by the same channel, that's alarming to me.
Yet, whenever I do this, CTs often claim that the source isn't important. Where it came from isn't important. Who is presenting their so-called evidence isn't important. The stuff presented in this one particular video or site is.
So do you guys do this when dealing with CTs? Do you try to point out to other CTs that the stuff they are linking to is filled with other crazy conspiracy theories as well?
The usual suspects are easy, but what about lesser known things like YouTube or satire sites?
What do you find reputable?
And do you automatically dismiss anything these people post?
Is that being objective? Or should one take a look regardless of posting history etc?
If I point out that the YouTube channel I have researched has videos about aliens and area 51 or sandy hook conspiracy videos all made by the same channel, that's alarming to me.
Yet, whenever I do this, CTs often claim that the source isn't important. Where it came from isn't important. Who is presenting their so-called evidence isn't important. The stuff presented in this one particular video or site is.
So do you guys do this when dealing with CTs? Do you try to point out to other CTs that the stuff they are linking to is filled with other crazy conspiracy theories as well?
The usual suspects are easy, but what about lesser known things like YouTube or satire sites?
What do you find reputable?
And do you automatically dismiss anything these people post?
Is that being objective? Or should one take a look regardless of posting history etc?
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/2eUtQWf
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire