The Rush Limbaugh Argument Essay

A popular phrase growing up might have been “don’t believe everything you see on the internet.” Many websites, newspapers, magazines, and networks may not present accurate information. A document can display information in a professional manner, but the information itself can be biased, and unsupported by evidence, ultimately making the presented information more of an opinion opposed to factual information. They are certainly hard to find, but credible and unbiased information does exist. “Being WEIRD: How Culture Shapes the Mind,” by Ethan Watters, has every quality that is expected of a credible document, as well as “Why Nice Guys Finish Last,” by Julia Serano, and “The weirdest people in the world?,” by Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine,

On November 2, 2010 Marco Rubio was elected to the U.S. Senate to represent Florida, receiving 48.9% of the votes. Marco Rubio is currently part of the U.S Senate, and won’t face another election until 2016. He was first elected to the Florida House on January 25, 2000. During the 2007 and 2008 legislative sessions Marco Rubio was the Speaker for Florida of House Representatives. For the 2006-2008 terms, Rubio was elected Speaker of the Florida State House in November 2006. Marco Rubio is a part of the Republican Party and is a Capitalist.

In article "The Fake News President", Progressive political comic's author Will Durst professes, "When a reporter pointed out the discrepancy, Trump dismissed him with, 'Well, I don't know, I was given that information.' Presumably by the same people who told him he won the debates, enjoys widespread popularity, and has accomplished

Think. Think about the many hours you have ever spent trying to solve a puzzle or riddle. Think about how that conundrum challenged you, how it would burn in the back of your mind, until you finally solved and revealed the answer. But it is not the answer to the question that is most intriguing, it is the pieces of insight or information that led you there. In any significant historic event, such as the tragic terrorist attack on the Twin Towers or the even the moon landing, there is almost always a conspiracy theory, following not far behind. Individuals usually attempt to contemplate the “true” reasoning behind WHY or HOW each major historic American event occurred, much like that puzzling conundrum. But the key questions to solve the riddle still remain. What information led us to this solution? Can it be trusted? The “CNNPolitics” Website article titled, “The new birthers: Debunking the Hillary Clinton health conspiracy” by reporter Gregory Krieg, explores just that, the information. The article examines the unending debate about, Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton’s health that was alleged by her opponent Donald Trump. Before joining CNN in November 2015, Gregory Krieg was a senior political reporter at Mic.com, where he helped lead the site 's coverage of the 2014 midterm elections and the start of the 2016 presidential primary season. Prior to that, Krieg was a reporter and producer for ABC News for eight years, covering everything from the 2008 and 2012

On Wednesday, October 14th, 2015, the Texas Insider published an article, Voters Know More About the Kardashians Than the Bushes & Clintons.

Giving help to the mentally ill is not only a major factor for his health care plan, it is also is a main component in his gun control battle. Once again Kasich’s stance is one of more moderate than his GOP competitors, but still is not a liberal view. All the way back in 1994, Kasich voted to ban assault weapons for the population’s purchase, this federal ban ended in 2004 and is still yet to be renewed. Following the tragic 1999 Columbine shootings, Kasich stated he believed a cool-off period for new laws, citing the missteps that were taken during the prohibition period of the 1920s. He also is quick to point out that these students broke 19 existing Colorado and Federal laws in their act saying, “The kids didn’t pay attention to the laws.

The mainstream media source I evaluated was from CNN. This source is credible due to it being a mainstream media source, however that doesn’t mean it isn’t politically biased. This news article focuses on the fact that there may never be a deal made due to the fact that democrats and republicans can’t negotiate. References were made from events that occured and valid quotes by political figures were embedded within the article. This adds to the credibility of the source. This article has minimal bias and is a credible source of

The information gained was: This is an article of the web, this is a negative viewpoint of trump and the author that wrote it is Andrew Prokop, who works for VOX [an American media company]. The title is "Trump has been president for two weeks, here’s what he’s done so far", the information gathered was mostly fact based but gave me the key insight into what the article was trying to verify. I believe this source is information based and really proves to be in a bias against Trump. This article said stuff such as: trump administration is a racial, nationalist, anti-Semitic, and religious campaign and because he is targeting and banning only Muslim majority countries for example: Syria, which is one of the seven banned countries. Not all people are bad, but Donald trump has banned not just one person he has banned a whole ethnicity from entering America, so this is bias because it is talking about religion, race and culture Yet I feel that the source is reliable, and prove to provide information for all three of my key questions and answers all of the three. However, another source of information about this first question is BBC an American website with "Trump executive order: who does the travel ban affect?" This information I gained about my first key question from this source is another website www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38781302, this gave me a more negative look of what the countries think of trump and if they like him or not. This source gave me further details on the overview on BBC due to their bias again as I have mentioned at the top, it is bias towards Muslims and the ban of Muslim countries is mostly affecting Muslim Majority countries this is religious bias, a whole race is getting affected due to some people turning bad and making a bad name for their culture. Which has impacted on the ordinary people that get affected because some people

The information provided on the Internet is not always factual for example the image of USA Crime Statistics - 2015 by the Crime Statistics Bureau-San Francisco. The image contained the following statistics: “ Blacks killed by whites -- 2%, Blacks killed by police -- 1%, Whites killed by police -- 3%, Whites killed by whites -- 16% , Whites killed by blacks -- 81%, Blacks killed by blacks -- 97%” (Greenberg). The image was widely circulated and believed to be true because it was from a source that appeared credible by name but does not actually exist. Though widely discredited and shown to be fake, many people tend to be skeptic of that fact for it was shared by people they support. It seemed so real that even presidential candidate Trump retweeted the image. He used the statistics to serve as a justification of his policies and gained more assured voters that his views/polices would solve the problems shown in this graphic. It seems that people rather believe what they want instead of the truth but how much of that is their own fault in world full of fake news. As consumers of information, is it our responsibility to differentiate or the media/internet to regulate information

As a college student, I found that being able to identify the credible or non-credible sources is very important for the any research projects or any college level assignments. As a result of my research on one single word “DIET” I found 672,000,000 items on the first page where I found at least one credible or trustful source and one non-credible sources or non-factual source. Here I have a web link from New York Times with information on diet: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/opinion/sunday/why-you-cant-lose-weight-on-a-diet.html. I believe this a reliable/credible source for research information because it’s reputation as a daily newspaper company for more than 162 years. Furthermore, a great neuroscientist and science writer Sandra Aamodt,

The article becomes suspect immediately when Doris Kearns Goodwin, a plagiarist and deceptive historic author who has a tendency to bending facts in her direction is quoted as a source. This should not be a big deal, but when one calls themselves a historian a certain level of standards need to apply to these people. Burnstein & Isenberg (2012) recently wrote that "Goodwin is a serial plagiarizer who has been welcomed back with open arms by the TV punditocracy. She directly and egregiously lifted quotes from others' works on multiple occasions a Pulitzer Prize winning book contained passages plagiarized from three different writers! and she quietly paid off one

Many people nowadays will always believe what they read off the internet. Either if it's a natural disaster or a normal everyday possibility. This article’s main point tells you every possibility of what people want you to believe and what to believe. To the point people just start to doubt everything they read on the internet. Even when it comes from a reliable source that most people know that is true.

In recent years, it appears that social media use has risen immensely. Due to new technological advancements, people have taken it to their advantage to report misleading or misguided information throughout the internet. To prevent getting fooled by fake information, one should do additional research, avoid any evidence of truthiness and look carefully for bias. To begin, when seeking information online, it can be difficult to identify between true fact and false data; therefore, using a tool to eliminate the chances of obtaining false information will be beneficial when researching. “Is it a primary or secondary source? … Are methods or references provided?... Who published the information?... Was it peer-reviewed” (Gratz). These questions

In this day and age, information spreads faster than could be imagined many years ago thanks to invention of the internet, tv, and cell phones. The whole world could discover something that happened on the very same day it was posted, and however amazing this may be it is also a beacon for disaster. If something is written on the internet, the whole world is prone to believe it if the writer sounds convincing enough. For example, in a piece I read recently, someone tried to convince people that they are in grave danger because of the dangerous chemical dihydrogen monoxide that kills thousands a year. However this oh so deadly chemical turns out to be

Whether it is the news on television, newspapers, or online sources, people have knowledge at a flick of the wrist. With such rapid communications, there gives way to a lot of misinformation. There is a lot of false advertisement in social media sites. Scammers advertise everything from new skin care products to prevent or reverse wrinkles to advances in technology. However, when these advertisements proclaiming breakthroughs in science are clicked on, almost always the website redirects to a new page, sometimes with no relation to the topic of the advertisement. If the site does follow through with the promises advertised, chances are the site is not credible. The same goes for news elsewhere. While things like the Nightly News at 6 might seem trustworthy, the information is not always an accurate representation. When a person takes information directly from these sources, that person can become wildly misinformed. Therefore, scientific findings should be “sound” before released to prevent