There is nothing wrong with having a dissenting conclusion from your own observations, but accepting some internet creators conclusions as your own without scrutiny is equally as bad or worse than accepting the government lies they say they are rejecting. If they applied the same skepticism to their fringe news sources, we’d be in a better place, I think.
True. However the fringe “influencers” often are the most vocal against the government and usually default as the “voice of reason” by simply being there.
Actual objective and unbiased information needs a visible and relatively trustworthy representative regular people can latch unto. Which is difficult because they will be attacked from all the sides who will be hampered by such a presence.
There is nothing wrong with having a dissenting conclusion from your own observations, but accepting some internet creators conclusions as your own without scrutiny is equally as bad or worse than accepting the government lies they say they are rejecting. If they applied the same skepticism to their fringe news sources, we’d be in a better place, I think.
True. However the fringe “influencers” often are the most vocal against the government and usually default as the “voice of reason” by simply being there.
Actual objective and unbiased information needs a visible and relatively trustworthy representative regular people can latch unto. Which is difficult because they will be attacked from all the sides who will be hampered by such a presence.