Alternative Media Can it be Trusted? | podcast

Alternative Media Can it be Trusted?

If we want the real information we cannot rely on mainstream media. But is Alternative media giving us the whole story? Those in the Truther Community tend to trust the alternative news because it is not the mainstream. These sites become our go to for conspiracy information, whistleblowing, and behind the scenes information. However, just because it isn’t mainstream doesn’t mean it is necessarily credible. You still have to cross-reference the info and confirm the sources. Many rely too much on them without question and then they spread the info without verifying. All this does is saturate the Internet with fabrications and blur the lines of the real info that we have difficulty getting it to the public.

Listen to “Alternative Media Can it be Trusted?” on Spreaker.

This topic was brought up because the Internet has become a vast pool of saturation and misinformation. The problem is that average citizens with no experience, lacking research ability, who have overimaginative minds can come up with theories, speculation, even stating it as fact without having evidence to support it. Creators come up with podcast, video, and blog content that very few actually look into to verify.

The searches bring up those shortsighted works that people will find and repost on their sites giving more publicity to the notion presented. When it gets saturated with consensus people are more likely to believe it as fact without having the burden of proof. This is not responsible. We need to make sure the information we spread is accurate and has evidence.

I have witnessed (falling for it myself at times) Alternative Media sites putting out a conspiracy in which after a search find it verified among other Alternative Media sites. It gives the impression it was well documented. But what I had found when looking deeper and tracing the original source, it comes back to an original story of one Alternative Media site. The others did not do their own research, they merely mirrored the original article. In the original it stated an unnamed whistleblower who claims to have insider Intel access, but cannot reveal his source, nor tell you he has evidence to back him. Yet because of his claim they take his information as credible. Others take that same article and include it on their site. That’s how this gets muddied.

I’ve also seen articles post a source to verify their information and conclusion that comes from an authorized document. Upon going to and reading the original source I find no such information made contributing to the article’s suspicion. Sometimes the argument is merely speculated, making a straw man argument for their own conclusion, and not even close to what the source alluded to. But many people are lazy and don’t follow up to verify the credibility. They rely blindly on the source telling their suspicion or conclusion.

Anyone can create content these days. The Internet is saturated with fabrications among the truth so it is your responsibility to verify if you are going to repost their garbage. I don’t expect you to be an expert researcher, that’s why you search what others create. However the least you can do is first do a quick search to verify if the contents are legit.

Creators, you have to stop presenting your speculation as absolute fact. If you are sharing your opinion, tell it as such. If you are speculating what you suspect, say that. But don’t bring us your unsubstantiated argument as a fact unless it has absolute evidence and verification you had first done yourself. Otherwise it is just speculation. In some cases you are even promoting fabrication. You’re no better than CNN.

Share this article: