recap
> Claims lack credibility to the extent they conflict with our observations, experience, or background information, or come from sources that lack credibility.
> The less initial plausibility a claim has, the more extraordinary it seems and the less it fits with our background information, the more suspicious we should be.
> Interested parties should always be viewed with more suspicion than disinterested parties.
> Doubts about sources generally fall into two categories: doubts about the source's knowledge or expertise and doubts about the source's veracity, objectivity, and accuracy.
> We can form reasonably reliable judgments about a person's knowledge by considering his or her education, experience, accomplishments, reputation, and position.
> Claims made by experts, those with special knowledge in a subject, are the most reliable, but the claims must pertain to the area of expertise and must not conflict with claims made by other experts in the same area.
> Major metropolitan newspapers, national news magazines, and network news shows are generally credible sources of news, but it is necessary to keep an open mind about what we learn from them.
> Governments have been known to influence and even to manipulate the news.
> Sources like Wikipedia, institutional websites, and news organizations can be helpful, but skepticism is the order of the day when we obtain information from unknown Internet sources or talk radio.
> Advertising assaults us at every turn, attempting to sell us goods, services, beliefs, and attitudes. Because substantial talent and resources are employed in this effort, we need to ask ourselves constantly whether the products in question will really make the differences in our lives that their advertising claims or hints they will make. Advertisers are always more concerned with selling you something than with improving your life. They are concerned with improving their own lives.
> What goes for talk radio, above, also for advocacy television.
> The less initial plausibility a claim has, the more extraordinary it seems and the less it fits with our background information, the more suspicious we should be.
> Interested parties should always be viewed with more suspicion than disinterested parties.
> Doubts about sources generally fall into two categories: doubts about the source's knowledge or expertise and doubts about the source's veracity, objectivity, and accuracy.
> We can form reasonably reliable judgments about a person's knowledge by considering his or her education, experience, accomplishments, reputation, and position.
> Claims made by experts, those with special knowledge in a subject, are the most reliable, but the claims must pertain to the area of expertise and must not conflict with claims made by other experts in the same area.
> Major metropolitan newspapers, national news magazines, and network news shows are generally credible sources of news, but it is necessary to keep an open mind about what we learn from them.
> Governments have been known to influence and even to manipulate the news.
> Sources like Wikipedia, institutional websites, and news organizations can be helpful, but skepticism is the order of the day when we obtain information from unknown Internet sources or talk radio.
> Advertising assaults us at every turn, attempting to sell us goods, services, beliefs, and attitudes. Because substantial talent and resources are employed in this effort, we need to ask ourselves constantly whether the products in question will really make the differences in our lives that their advertising claims or hints they will make. Advertisers are always more concerned with selling you something than with improving your life. They are concerned with improving their own lives.
> What goes for talk radio, above, also for advocacy television.