Q&A: Investigating Reports
Investigating Reports
Question
Hello Rabbi!
Sorry in advance for being so general, but I suspect you'll manage to address what I'm asking.
So I'll start: in recent weeks, the repeated and mounting reports by "journalists" about politicians have really started to bother me. Broadly speaking, of course, more from the left because of the scale and the cunning, but in my opinion the systematic nature of this approach exists today across all media outlets, which are trying to extract from me the emotions they're looking for so they can use us as tools for their ideology—and I'm sick of it.
I really think there's something we badly need amid today's ideological chaos: how to investigate reports like these, and how to approach examining arguments and reports of this kind.
Laymen like me are helpless מול all these activist agendas. Without familiarity with professional fields like law, the military, economics. I'd be glad to stop being lazy and understand how little old me can create for myself a way to break down reports and arguments, at least on a basic level—how to evaluate information sources, where and how to look for data. Maybe there are philosophical principles that could help on this issue. This need has grown stronger for me these days around the Qatargate coverage; everything there just seems vague, and I feel I have to sort things out for myself. Even if you have YouTube videos you think might help, I'd be happy to know about them. Thank you!
Answer
It's hard to give general methods. A few recommendations:
1. Even when you have a position, take into account the possibility that you're mistaken.
2. Listen to reports from all sides, but critically. Don't attach yourself to one particular channel.
3. In every report, pay close attention to what is fact and what is interpretation, conclusion, or general declaration. "The destruction of democracy" is not a fact but a declaration. "Bibi is corrupt"—same thing. "The Kaplan protesters are left-wing"—same thing.
4. There are clues for when something is fake. Stay away from information passed on to you by private individuals who have some friend "in the know." At least as long as there is no verification.
5. When people make analogies and bring examples, examine carefully whether it is really similar (hint: almost never). The same goes for statistical arguments. Stay away from those like fire.
If you follow these approaches, I think you'll be able to get an impression of the facts and then form a position. Carefully and skeptically.
In general, we do not have direct access to facts except through media mediation. So pay attention to #1.
Discussion on Answer
Thank you very much for the answer. I'd be happy to go a bit deeper and ask: what is the way to distinguish between conclusions and interpretations? For example, how can one tell the difference between a tendentious statement and a statement that presents itself like a declaration that may rely on some factual source? Is there really a way to analyze a report in an orderly way and understand the overall semantics of the report?
Any statement that does not present the facts is just a statement. The fact that someone says there are facts behind it is of little significance.
Even if he does present them, it may still be that he is lying, interpreting tendentiously, or simply mistaken.
Be careful with experts. In most fields there are no real experts, and even in fields where there are—they're human beings, and opinions are biased. Listen to experts from both sides.
You also don't need to form an opinion about Qatargate. Wait for the investigation to end, and for the trial if there is one. Why does everyone need to have an opinion on everything right now?!