By Josemaria Moreno
As we have seen recently, there is a wave of misinformation sweeping the country about a variety of worrisome topics. These include politics, health, the economy, and surprisingly, even history. It is difficult to discern between reliable information and propaganda today. Many readers have abandoned the auspices of institutional media and have instead found a refuge of certainty in independent media.
The intention of this column is not to promote certain information channels and discredit others, but rather to summarize some of the most relevant points that can guide us when selecting our sources of information. This is in order to define whether the information that is presented to us is reliable and meets the age-old standards of reliable journalism. We will paraphrase and comment on an article by Bertrand Russell. He was a philosopher of implacable logic and author of “Principia Mathematica” together with A.N. Whitehead. Russell also authored a beautiful piece of practical humanism: “The Conquest of Happiness.” In 1951 he wrote “The Best Response to Fanaticism” for the New York Times. The text works perfectly in the context of journalism and life in general.
1. Never trust that you are completely sure of something. Truth is not a monolithic question and most of the time requires the reconstruction of a variety of perspectives that are honest and humble.
2. In your speech, do not try to hide the evidence—otherwise, invariably, it will surface. This is surely one of the most notable mistakes that most journalists make. A journalist should not have a political or economic agenda to fill, and those who do tend to fall under their own weight as frauds or sellouts. What they hide for their convenience shines a spotlight on their lies.
3. At the beginning of any investigation, don’t be afraid of not finding something relevant. An honest investigation must grow on its own and will take you to its end even if it is not as flashy as you would have liked.
4. If you find opposition to your arguments, do not discredit it with the weight of authority; let your arguments be the ones that hold up and resist the attack.
5. An authority figure does not have to be respected by itself. There will always be another authority that thinks otherwise, and we return to the previous point.
6. Do not base yourself on a position of power to silence voices that are contrary to you. A journalist who takes refuge in power and money immediately arouses suspicion, and it is necessary to read him assuming from the beginning that his story is a lie; but don’t forget the above rules.
7. If your research leads you to eccentric conclusions, don’t be afraid to pronounce them in all their splendor and simplicity. Previously reviled opinions are often today’s paradigms.
8. A dissenting critical opinion is more valuable than a passive recipient. Intelligence is an evaluative judgment, that is, it is an argument that weighs antecedents and consequences while weighing contexts and nuances.
9. Be impeccable in your search for the truth and announce it. If you try to hide it, we have already seen it—it will come out and stain the only thing a journalist has: his reputation.
10. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. Do not feel envy for the fools who live in a stubborn paradise and defend their half-truths tooth and nail; let your investigation surround you and do not think for a moment about the conspiracy of fools that plague the pages of all the newspapers of all time.
