Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
This is where we fundamentally differ.
Yes, and I feel this is the main issue here. All reporting has some kind of editorial bias, either political partisanship or more commonly sensationalism. There are still actual news organizations that at least try to neutrally report current events (AP and Reuters come to mind), and then there are those that try to interpret those events through their own lenses. The first group is who I trust, since even though they too do make mistakes, they're actually trying to be journalists and have some integrity. They're still the best data source out there.

The second group is most of the rest of the news media, with varying degrees of bias. This doesn't mean they're outright lies, but the bias shows in their reporting. If you're aware of the bias, a lot of them are still perfectly credible sources. I'm sure a lot of, or at least some bloggers/vloggers/independent websites fall under this category too, but you might really have to do some digging to find out what their agenda is. There are things like these that may help in finding out.

Then there's a 3rd group, which consists of the bullshit machines. Nowadays anyone can be a publisher, and it shows. I wouldn't believe a word what some Craig says unless the sources are clearly cited and the data corroborated on other sites.

It's hard to know nowadays who is right, there's conflicting info about everything. This just means one should look at every source critically, I like the analogy of pretending it's always April 1st. Just being dismissive about all mainstream reporting and blindly accepting unverified alternative sources is about the worst thing one can do.

Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
Well I haven't seen footage of this, and I don't really want to seek it out.
Being skeptical and being ignorant are different things. Don't be a полезный идиот.