Photo bygeralt on Pixabay
in

Reactions to Sources

I received a link to an article from a newspaper I consider disreputable.

I don’t know whether “disreputable” is the right word. I haven’t looked it up on any list and didn’t know much about it.

But, five out of five articles that I had found there via Google/News that had sounded interesting turned out to be somewhere between grossly misleading and simply untrue. A while back, I suppressed it from my news feed and hadn’t thought about it since.

This particular article was sent by a colleague that I sit on an advisory board with and is beautifully written. It describes how a particular Noble Peace Prize winner would think about some of the current events. I’m guessing that it’s wrong, but I don’t know for sure. It would be a fair bit of work to figure this out. More work than I am ready to do today.

They are going to want to talk about it at the advisory board meeting. I don’t know what to do or what I will say.

When I opened up a browser to write this, I saw a link to a youtube video titled that it was proving something well known to be true to actually be false. As I was getting ready to complain about the feed algorithms, I noticed the channel name had the word Comedy in it.

Perhaps that news source was meant to be satire and I just missed it.

I have seen articles from The Onion and The Journal of Irreproducible Results cited by writers who didn’t realize they were humor and ultimately published despite there being fact-checkers in the process.

I don’t actually think that this news source is really meant to be humor. I don’t think that treating it as such will get me through the advisory board meeting.

Perhaps I should stick to “Lots of weather we’ve been having lately,” and “Wasn’t the traffic one Hell of a commute to our zoom meeting.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings

Written by Russell Brand

Russell has started three successful companies, one of which helped agencies of the federal government become very early adopters of open source software, long before that term was coined. His first project saved The American taxpayer 250 million dollars. In his work within federal agency, he was often called, “the arbiter of truth,” facilitating historically hostile groups and factions to effectively work together towards common goals

 

Your First Animated Explainer Video

Closeup Photo of Primate 

What do you do with found time?