posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 08:44 AM
Well, as I'm taking your OP to really be about sourcing and how people are using/looking at it as opposed to Obama or Iran as more than
examples...I'll just comment there..
I think it's a great point too! Sourcing, the total lack of it or the use of outright baffling ones as 'reliable' is probably the biggest shortcoming
of an otherwise great little system of news that ATS has developed into being over time. It's wonderful to so regularly see news here and flip to the
MSM websites or TV coverage to see the literal first breaking reports after first knowing half the story from the ATS material.
Then again... It's something less than stellar to see the 10th story about how Obama or Bush were really Reptilian Aliens in disguise and the original
'V' series was a warning not entertainment.
I think it's all in how people use the sources. Personally, I don't outright ignore any source. Any of them. Even the National Enquirer at the
supermarket gets a casual glance at checkout. (C'mon...you look too.. Admit it.
) What changes for me is just how many secondary confirmation
sources I think I need to believe what I'm reading. If it's the N.E., then I'm reading at LEAST 2-3 other sources before figuring Batboy might really
exist after all.
As far as the Super-Stories like Obama, Iran, Deepwater Horizon or Katrina....Umm... I don't ignore any one source because someone HAS to read damn
near all of them
to take it all
in and sort just to get a basic
sense of having the truth of the matter. In that way..and the
Mega-topics, I don't think source really matters anyway. They copy EACH OTHER..and word for word....often enough to know damn well half are just
reporting on what the OTHER half have stolen from the notes of the FEW whole actually talked to or saw a direct part of a story.
25-9-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)