Your faith in information
 

How do you feel about the information and news you read and receive from the internet? Do you 100% believe in everything you read? Do you think everything is fake and/or a lie? Do you take everything with a grain of salt? Something more to add on to this?

I'll put my opinion after I hear some of yours.

I believe that almost everything that I read from a media source is bias, and only showing one point of view. So I tend to try and imagine the other side of the picture with everything that I read.

i try to feel the blood, bones, and flesh before i believe...

Unfortunately, I'm easily swayed by a well-written article. I'm well aware that I'm reading a biased / false account of a story when it's written by Joe Internet, but I often let my curiosity get the best of me. Plus, the Internet's take on things is usually funnier and more interesting than broadcast media. A nice blend of humor and a little bit of truth is enough to convince me... I'm a simple man.

data > information > knowledge > wisdom

The further down the chain, the easier it is manipulated.

The media consists mostly of information, so we need to tread carefully, because you never know what data it is based upon.

Websites and news should not be your only sources of learning.

I don't believe in things. If the scientific method can be applied and is not, I don't accept the results. Beyond what is scientifically provable, I demand hard evidence. I assume that people disseminating information are trying to deceive me unless they can back up their claims.

I don't accept what I read as the truth. I think that everything I read is subject to being slanted in some way. So, I read and I read and I read....and then I think about it. Often for too long. I make my own decisions/interpretations based on different opinions and what I know to be factual information. It is rare that I am satisfied with a final truth of any sort. I just keepa thinkin' about it. This leads to a good deal of stress, since no one and no website or information source can really be trusted.

I don't believe anyone is going to admit that they "100% believe in everything they read." No one wants to believe they are entirely gullible or that the wool has been pulled over their eyes. Just like 80% of people believing they're in the top 10%, most people who are being tricked or mislead are likely very unaware of it.

That only leaves "with a grain of salt" and perpetual cynic.

I'm going to with perpetual cynic, unless it matches my worldview and is written with correct grammar and usage. I'd be a damn liar if I said I subjected things I agreed with to the same scrutiny as the things I disagreed with. I can usually find evidence that something I disagree with false within minutes, and often take the opportunity. I could probably find evidence that something I agree with is false too, but it's the less likely and less-used option, for sure.

FTFY.

I take everything with a grain of salt. Even offline, I take information in books and newspapers with a grain of salt just because I've read two biographical books about the same person and they stated completely opposite things occurring in the same period of time. Also, the media tends to be biased... and very stupid. They seem to be the last to know anything that happens online. What I read/see COULD be true... but it really doesn't matter to me unless it affects me personally.

I only completely believe what I read is official/fact if I read it on a government website. Not saying if they say "Our city is the best!" I'm going to believe it.. but if they say they have $suchandsuch and they are going to use it for suchandsuch, then I'll believe them on that.

I dare say I generally start off each of my internet travels with a HUGEASS jar of salt which I replenish on a daily basis. I also make sure my intellectual functions are running normally and at an optimal level as I regularly douse them with copious amounts of incredulity. They make the believing process more reliable, so to speak.

The key is to read more from different sources. The larger your sample size, the more likely you are to spot inconsistencies and bias.

I find that much of actual journalism is a pretty straightforward reporting of facts (x did something to y). I find that a lot of what people are talking about when they speak of journalistic bias is actually commentary. Commentary by its very nature is biased.

I get all of my news from Fox News. So, yeah, I believe 100% of what they tell me. Why wouldn't I?

Ideas,
so malleable,
aren't themselves.

(Pass the saltshaker,
but please don't knock it over,
on its way to me.)

Critical thinking must be applied to all information coming in. I think about who is relaying this information, what the source is, what the other side could be. It is the best thing I learned in school.

I am just like everyone else in that I believe what I want to believe.

I believe you, filtherton.

Do you though? I mean, I could be manipulating your perceptions and, like, whoa....

You just totally blew my mind.

Have you ever just, like, looked at your hand?