Healthy Skepticism

How do voters know when something proposed or enacted by our political leaders is good or bad for the country? In an age when we have more sources than ever for information and opinions, it’s tempting to let others make that judgment on our behalf, isn’t it? Here are some of our options: (a) Let President Donald Trump or Governor Greg Abbott or Judge Dan Mueller tell us what to think about what they are doing, and believe them without question.

(b) Check Fox News or the New York Times or Wall Street Journal or Fayette County Record’s “Opinion” section and believe the commentators there, no matter their income level, educational background, or other credentials.

(c) Follow “influencers” of our choice on social media (such as Facebook, or Elon Musk on his X site, or countless others), and just believe whatever they post or what draws the most likes or other indications of approval from other readers.

None of those options, dear readers, passes the smell test for me, and here’s why: (a) the chief policy-maker himself does not know my own values or life situation like I do (unless I were as close as Musk is to Trump, of course); (b) the commentators are people who are helping to generate viewers (Fox News) or subscribers (national newspapers) and are unlikely to have my own particular interests in mind: they are focused on driving revenue for their employers. In the case of The Fayette County Record, of course, the letter-writers and columnists are mostly if not all unpaid, so they don’t have a financial stake in the battle, just their own egos (present company NOT excepted: there’s no monetary compensation for me at stake in these columns, only ego!).

In the case of (c) social media influencers, their own status with readers draws ever greater influence and higher endorsement contracts, so their own income and wealth are driven by their numbers of “followers”.

So who do I believe? I’m pretty skeptical about virtually every single source I come across, no matter who is writing or speaking, or what organization is represented. The only possible way to proceed for someone like me, who likes to reserve judgment until a source has a track record of reliability, is to read and listen broadly and deeply, and then to support sources that have demonstrated their independence, or their willingness to take risks in bucking power structures that have special interests.

There are publications that have staked out their territory over many decades and remain true to that mission, through thick and thin. I subscribe to both the New York Times and the Wall St. Journal, mainstream press daily publications, both respected for decades by traditional liberals and traditional conservatives, respectively. While I don’t agree wholly with either one when it comes to their commentaries on the opinion pages, I find value in reading the ideas of people on both sides of that traditional “divide.”

I am NOT a social media fan, dear readers. Here’s why: there is no one “in charge” who is knowledgeable and professionally trained to delete the garbage before it grabs hold of the minds of the most gullible in our society. When the only metric behind most of the social media sites is the aim of making more money, I don’t want to go there at all. So you won’t find me posting on Facebook or X or Truth Social, or even on LinkedIn, now that I am retired.

While most folks find our instant information society convenient and helpful, I am mostly skeptical of much value beyond my use of text messaging, email, and entertainment (like streaming). I have yet to activate any of my appliances’ capacities to communicate with me via wi-fi, and so far I haven’t suffered from that lack of their input into my life. Instead, I save that distraction time, and spend it with friends, staying focused on the personal contact of the moment.

Join me in being skeptical, dear readers, even of what you read in my own columns.