To what % might you say you 'believe' news/information eminating from the Internet?

[Uber Sparky]

If I would (a bit haphazardly do this) I would place it at...

5%.

Why?

The Internet is simply too wide open (generally a good thing) with too many holes - to be very credible and therefore believable.

What do you say?

 

[RastaPope]

I'd look at most of it with the same skepticism as I do newspaper and television news.

But perhaps a little less, since the net gives access to news from thousands more sources than television. Bit less bias in places.

Not that I really give a lick about the world beyond what's important to me.

 

[Uber Sparky]

Give me some logic here...

Why? Because it 'comes from more sources' would it be less biased?

Bias is everywhere - and the Internet is 'the perfect' place for biased individuals to voice their bias messages.

It's like a magnet for those people - some call them nuts. They can 'get away with it here' - in subtle wasy and blatant ways.

Please explain.

 

[Uber Sparky]

Bside - as everyone knows...

there is a 'filter' for (so-called) journalists - good or bad as it may be...

There is no such filter for 'internet (so-called) journalists.

I mean, draw your own conclusions.

 

[teddybear4play]

This is precisely what I tell people who try to ram IndyMedia down my throat. At the very least, people on the news have a reputation to protect. If Dan Rather, intentionally or accidentally, shaded the truth, and it was discovered, his reputation as a journalist would suffer. Same for Ashleigh Banfield or Geraldo Rivera or CNN as a whole.

While that's not exactly a guarantee of complete truthfulness, some schmuck with a webpage has absolutely nothing to stop him from lying his ass off. But some people believe that simply because he is "independent," means he's always honest. Well, if you buy that shit, you're the same lemming as everyone else, just running over a different cliff.

TB4p

 

[Uber Sparky]

It's amazing to me how so many folks out there...

'want to believe' that most of the social systems that we have put in place over our human history are so complexly flawed - even evil.

(No, not this kid - don't quite believe in evil at all.)

They 'want to believe' in complex, spookey theories. They want to believe that they are being manipulated or controlled - or lied to.

They have such a hard time with any sort of even partial acceptance of 'in-place systems' - such as is the general state of US Journalism.

Of course mistakes are allays made - but hidden agendas of misinformation to foster 'evil' ways - are very, very rare.

I certainly am not saying that everyone should blindly trust all these systems - hell no - they always need improving. I'm just saying take off the blinders and take a look around - not everybody is bent on your destruction.

 

[Coolville]

Internet "news" sites are hardly reliable. Hell, I could start one up and get all sorts of underground people to write articles. Sinthysist always quotes Newsmax, Busybody always links to blogs... hardly reliable sources.

With a bit of effort you can find sites on the net to support any view you may have on any issue. I stick to established newspapers websites and established TV stations websites.

 

[bknight2602]

....

With a bit of effort you can find sites on the net to support any view you may have on any issue. I stick to established newspapers websites and established TV stations websites.

And these are unbiased?