Service Alert
- Who is the publisher? Do they have a financial or political incentive to present a certain point of view?
- Who is the author? What is their relationship to the topic? Are they qualified to speak on the subject? Do they have any financial or political incentives?
- How does this source contribute to the conversation? Does it offer a unique perspective or take? Are there better or more reliable sources I could use instead?
- For news sources, is it original reporting? Are they repeating what another news agency said or breaking new information?
Ask these before you read the content, but you don't always need dismiss a source if it fails one of the questions.
Fox local news may offer a very different perspective than Fox cable even though they're owned by the same company. An economist writing for an academic journal may offer different authority than the same economist writing an opinion column for the Guardian. Even overt bias can still be useful -- if you know about it.
Use Wikipedia and Google! If you search for the author, news organization, or website in Wikipedia you can get a quick idea of the political leanings and reputation of a source. Should you take everything on Wikipedia as fact? Of course not, but it gives you a place to start.
A quick Wikipedia of the Cato Institute, for example, lets you know that they are a libertarian think tank. You can make up your own mind about how much this political bias appears in their work, but that gives you a lens to begin thinking about what they write.
Remember, fact checking sites can be biased too! Look into who owns and runs these sites and what methodologies they use.
