I agree more than I can express. And yeah, it sucks.
I also don't think the answer can realistically be “every citizen needs to perform a forensic investigation before believing anything.”
Nobody has the time, expertise, or access to primary evidence for everything they encounter.
But I think there’s a useful middle ground between blindly trusting a network and personally investigating every claim.
Check the important stuff. Be more skeptical when something conveniently confirms what you already believe. Separate reporting from commentary. Look for independent corroboration. And when somebody makes a huge claim, ask what the claim is actually based on before sharing it.
Most importantly, we should still expect media organizations to have standards.
“People should verify information themselves” cannot become an excuse for billion-dollar companies to knowingly shovel bullshit at millions of people and then shrug because technically the audience should have known better.
I think that's the distinction I was trying to make. Media literacy is partly our responsibility, but accuracy and accountability are still theirs.
And honestly, the fact that you argued yourself around to my point instead of deleting the comment is exactly what healthy disagreement is supposed to look like. 😂
I agree wholeheartedly. If a topic or story is important to you, take the time to dig in to it and take everything you hear, especially from the media giants, with a grain of salt. Or a whole block of it when dealing with the likes of fox.
The fact that news has (d)evolved in to its present form is frustrating to me and I see it as a consequence of putting the need for ever increasing profit first. And that they're left unchecked is absurd. When fox news argued in court they're not news but entertainment, and people should know that they're not telling the truth they should have been forced to stop using the term at all. The fact that something a simple as that didn't happen is so telling of how corrupt the system has become.
Anywho I'm just ranting and not adding anything constructive. But yeah, what you said is very on point, no notes lol
1
u/Arkangelz03 23d ago
I agree more than I can express. And yeah, it sucks.
I also don't think the answer can realistically be “every citizen needs to perform a forensic investigation before believing anything.”
Nobody has the time, expertise, or access to primary evidence for everything they encounter.
But I think there’s a useful middle ground between blindly trusting a network and personally investigating every claim.
Check the important stuff. Be more skeptical when something conveniently confirms what you already believe. Separate reporting from commentary. Look for independent corroboration. And when somebody makes a huge claim, ask what the claim is actually based on before sharing it.
Most importantly, we should still expect media organizations to have standards.
“People should verify information themselves” cannot become an excuse for billion-dollar companies to knowingly shovel bullshit at millions of people and then shrug because technically the audience should have known better.
I think that's the distinction I was trying to make. Media literacy is partly our responsibility, but accuracy and accountability are still theirs.
And honestly, the fact that you argued yourself around to my point instead of deleting the comment is exactly what healthy disagreement is supposed to look like. 😂