[mikewarot]

Everything has to be weighted with a probability, which is conditional upon the nature of the story, and the incentives of the source. Here's an example... Russia Today (RT).

If you want to find out about wrongdoing in a US corporation, a US advertising funded channel is likely to avoid upsetting a sponsor. On the other hand, someone actively pointing out flaws in the US to sew division, like RT, has a strong incentive to do so, and try to retain credibility, and build up their viewers trust to use later as a wedge.

On the other hand, they will never say anything bad about Russia, other than trivialities.

Always keep in mind, incentives and the narratives those incentives align with. The higher the stakes, the more uncertain you should be.

You also have to try to keep in mind your own emotional and cognitive biases. Those are the ones that social media feeds on. If it upsets or delights you, you're more likely to react, as is everyone else. Which the advertising driven media will then feed on top of.