Reply to thread

That's why I said that the most reliable sources are peer reviewed journals. They have a level of established credibility. At least when you pick up a newspaper you usually know what you are going to get. If you pick up a Washington Times, you get a conservative view. If you pick up a Washington Post, you get a liberal view. There is still a bias, but everyone with half a brain knows the bias is there before making a choice. One of the problems with internet sources is masking the true intent of what is being said. You have no idea of who is saying it, and in most cases, you don't know the bias that these people have shown on previous occasions. Using the internet as a news source doesn't make you think for yourself anymore than regular print media, in fact since many internet sources do not have a known track record of leaning a certain way on certain issues, many people accept what is said at face value. That is why I believe that unless a site has a proven reputation of being  a credible source, you cannot accept it as being more than the opinion of someone you would meet on the street.