When have we not had to read carefully to see what is useful and what isn’t?
Conservatives have had to know how to pull the useful information out of the media for at least my lifetime, and I think well before that.
Conservatives have always had to read Soviet style and some of us are very good at it, when I could afford it I tried to read five daily papers and several dozens of magazines a month, the more one digests the easier it is to filter through, it is the same way some of us could learn military secrets just by vast amounts of reading public sources, for
example when Tom Clancy was investigated for his military knowledge he had to explain that he just read a lot of public sources and was good at filtering through them.
I call it Politifake.
Any person or group who calls themselves "Fact Checkers" are not interested in presenting the truth, but are "checking" the facts: as in the second definition of verb (used with object):
I analyze articles and even parts of articles on a case by case basis according to logic, sources and previous research. It’s stupid to generalize against a publication that offers at least some good information.
It’s even more stupid to allow yourself to react like a knee jerk to such generalizations and be sucked by autocratic crooks into a regime of crazy talk. And above all, resist confirmation bias, which is the way to being a member of the booby hatch class.
It is a fallacy to generalize the “’fact-checking’ industry” (all fact checking sites and every article on them) to the reputation of one individual (a teachers’ union head). By trying to rout every voter to conspiracy theory sites, you’ll lose most of the voters.
Most teachers in public schools can pound sand. I mean it.
Hot air isn’t much better