I wouldn't jump on this too fast -- I saw this a couple days ago on some other sites that have very low credibility in my opinion. I'd like to see some more proof. I think SCOTUS is smart enough to not say that when it could be recorded or overheard. Unless this was leaked from the NSA or something...
Yeah. I know what you mean. It's a sign of the times. A big reason is that mainstream media is so unreliable as well, but alternative media sources vary wildly in quality too. I try to synthesize both by weeding out the bad info.
I've always looked at "alternative" sites. Some are often accurate, others are only accurate 10% of the time.
I argued this with a friend who asked "why do look at a source only right 10% of the time?"
Because that 10% is important info and not being surfaced anywhere else. It's a signal that would never surface except from non-mainstream. The edge-case person, the edge-case blogger is the one who would have it.
Having said that, when I look at those sites I think "90% of this is bullshit"... to get the good 10% it has to (1) pass the smell test (with my experience and professional knowledge, it makes sense), (2) be corroborated by other totally different sources where you can tell they didn't just repeat the same story (ie additional confirmable details), and (3) have some sort of hard evidence linked to some a good source.
I wouldn't jump on this too fast -- I saw this a couple days ago on some other sites that have very low credibility in my opinion. I'd like to see some more proof. I think SCOTUS is smart enough to not say that when it could be recorded or overheard. Unless this was leaked from the NSA or something...
I feel like most of our side switched from mainstream media to reading "news" sites with titles like http://1776PatriotMAGANewsFreedomWatch.info
Yeah. I know what you mean. It's a sign of the times. A big reason is that mainstream media is so unreliable as well, but alternative media sources vary wildly in quality too. I try to synthesize both by weeding out the bad info.
I've always looked at "alternative" sites. Some are often accurate, others are only accurate 10% of the time.
I argued this with a friend who asked "why do look at a source only right 10% of the time?"
Because that 10% is important info and not being surfaced anywhere else. It's a signal that would never surface except from non-mainstream. The edge-case person, the edge-case blogger is the one who would have it.
Having said that, when I look at those sites I think "90% of this is bullshit"... to get the good 10% it has to (1) pass the smell test (with my experience and professional knowledge, it makes sense), (2) be corroborated by other totally different sources where you can tell they didn't just repeat the same story (ie additional confirmable details), and (3) have some sort of hard evidence linked to some a good source.