Comment: Just start with citing

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: LMAO.... explain 'basic (see in situ)

Just start with citing

Just start with citing sources. The Infowars pieces I've fact checked often cite blogs. And they cite them as sources, not bothering to actually be a reporter, who tracks down primary sources.

So it's appropriate for a journalist to quote a person as saying something way out there. The quote is attributed and the reader knows that the veracity of the quote rests on the reputation of the source. Infowar pieces often repeat quotes from some blog writer who is passing along a quote supposedly from another source. Try tracking them back. Try to find out who actually said it. If and when you can actually track back to a real person with a real reputation, look at the context and the entirety of what that source said or wrote. By the way you will have to do all that work because Infowar writers are not reporters, they're clip-and-pasters. By the way, if you actually do the work of a reporter and track back to original sources, you will find that Infowars deliberately misconstrues over and over again.

I'm not saying that every reporter is pure, and I'm not saying that mistakes both honest and icky don't happen. I'm saying that AJ and his Infowars team most definitely have an agenda and that they are so into themselves that they don't even bother with basic journalist standards.

Test just the source citing and see for yourself.