"Trusted source" is indeed tricky to assess.
But two simple steps -check the journalist's record, and look for corroboration sources- are good ways to separate what's reliable from dishonesty/propaganda.
FTR it should be taught in schools
(Kids can get it -and need to)
But two simple steps -check the journalist's record, and look for corroboration sources- are good ways to separate what's reliable from dishonesty/propaganda.
FTR it should be taught in schools
(Kids can get it -and need to)
https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1454843655152410625
And it's not just about politics: It's about disinfo in general.
Last year my then 8 yrs old came home from his dad telling me about this boy who could "set things on fire with his eyes" (something he had seen on TV)
"It's a true thing mum, some experts said so!"
...
Last year my then 8 yrs old came home from his dad telling me about this boy who could "set things on fire with his eyes" (something he had seen on TV)
"It's a true thing mum, some experts said so!"
...
To assess the veracity of the claim, we did an Internet search.
First search page claimed the boy existed and "experts" had confirmed it.
So we took a look at the sources. Their name, their other claims. Kid soon realised they were talking bullsh**.
First search page claimed the boy existed and "experts" had confirmed it.
So we took a look at the sources. Their name, their other claims. Kid soon realised they were talking bullsh**.
We found no official confirmation it was bullsh*t by an actual scientist (because actual scientists have better things to do. But the argument "If it was true, real scientists would be running studies" talked to my "I wanna be a scientist" boy.
Cross-reference.
Assess the source.
Cross-reference.
Assess the source.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
