Keep on Googlin'

First, let’s kick things off with a little Credence Clearwater Revival song parody.
Keep on Googlin',Keep on Googlin',Keep on Googlin',Googlin',Googlin'.
Maybe you don't understand it,But if you're a curious mind,You got to LOL and have a good time,And that's why you go Googlin'.
You Porn Mary, lookin' for hairies,She gotta Google tonight.There goes Lou, searchin’ the Alt Right sewerHe gonna Google all night.
Keep on Googlin',Keep on Googlin',Keep on Googlin',Googlin',Googlin', Googlin'.
Black is whiteUp is downYou can find it onlineThe earth is flatThe sky’s an illusionIt’ll all blow your mind
Keep on Googlin',Keep on Googlin',Keep on Googlin',Googlin',Googlin'.
If you can choose it, who can refuse it?Y'all be Googlin' tonight.Go on, take your pick, info tailor-fit Just gotta Google tonight.
Keep on Googlin',Derp on Googlin',Slurp up Googlin',Googlin',Googlin',Googlin', Googlin',Googlin', Googlin'.
Just before the California primary I got into it online with a couple of Bernie supporters who were telling me that the media was so in the tank for Hillary that they were suspending exit polling because it had consistently exposed the “rigged” results and shown that Bernie was really winning. I told them I thought that was absurd because, political conspiracies aside, the networks depend upon exit polling to provide content for their endless hours of primary coverage. I asked to see the source of their hysteria. They presented a link to a story in the Sacramento Bee, a reputable source, indeed reporting that the media was suspending exit polling for the California primary. Only problem…for my adversaries…was that the story was clearly dated 2012, when Barack Obama and Mitt Romney had essentially wrapped up their nominations so exit polling in California was a moot point. When I pointed this out to my (ahem) worthy opponents, they cut off the exchange and blocked me from further contact with them. There are walls…and then there are walls.
Then in a thread commemorating the anniversary of Ann Frank’s family going into hiding in Amsterdam, someone commented that the family was condemned to its fate by Franklin Roosevelt personally who refused to allow them into the US because he was “a rabid anti-Semite.”  I replied that I didn’t think the commenter understood the meaning of the word "rabid" and probably didn’t know what an anti-Semite was either since FDR had appointed his life long friend Felix Frankfurter, descended from a long line of rabbis, to the United States Supreme Court. The commenter then came back with links to three websites supporting her claim and invited me to Google to see for myself. Well, of course, having played this game before I knew how easy it would be to find such reinforcing online sources if one were so inclined…just as easily as it would be to find online sources supporting the claim that there was a Jewish conspiracy to control worldwide banking and media. 
And then “Google it” jumped the shark with Rudy Guiliani’s embarrassing performance when asked to support his contention that Hillary Clinton is facing severe health issues. Just search Hillary Clinton illness on the internet, he claimed, "there are pictures". Yes, and just Google Rudy Guiliani dressed in drag in Donald Trump’s arms: 
Giuliani-Trump troubled romance...it's on the Internet!I love the Internet. If I have to submit a closing ledger on the day I die, the Internet will definitely be in the plus column. All those resources and information at your fingertips…it is a paradise for someone like me who really enjoys research. I can and have let entire days go by hopping from one website to another tracking down the truth of a thing...like a busy bee searching a flower garden for the ultimate honey shot. But like most everything else in human existence, the Internet does not come without its darkside. For all the useful, reliable information it contains, it also struggles under the weight of outright lies, deception, manipulation, and simple ignorance disguised as fact. The sheer mass of information…good, bad and ugly…makes it hard for the ordinary, workaday, social media butterfly to sort out. There was a time when you could tell someone peddling errant information to just look it up, but now when you do there’s no guarantee that they won’t find confirmation of their bias. 
In the field of Logical Fallacies, which the Nob will be exploring in posts to come, there's one called "Appeal to Authority":     

Saying that because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true. It’s important to note that this fallacy should not be used to dismiss the claims of experts, or scientific consensus. Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding. (Example: Not able to defend his position that evolution ‘isn’t true’ Bob says that he knows a scientist who also questions evolution.) 

Making this one even more fallacious is that “the Internet” itself has now achieved the status of universal, indisputable authority. Merely saying “It’s on the Internet” is presumed to end all argument. What’s a body to do? Friend Dean Stevens alerts me to this helpful link from a group of historians…and historians should be the most vested in helping keep Internet wheat separated from the chaff. Their post, however, puts “Google it” at the top of their list for checking the reliability of information, so after this post I can’t fully endorse that. But Snopes.com comes in at #2 on their list, and Snopes is a national treasure…though overworked and constantly under attack for bias by those with…wait for it...bias. The other items on the historians' list are helpful, but I’d add a few of my own:Once you’ve been burned by a source or a source has been shown to be blatantly unreliable, steer clear of it...make your sources earn your trust.Don't assume that just because a source confirms your personal bias, it's a good source...know thyself and the human weakness for flattery and affirmation.Check things out on the mainstream media…The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, etc. Whatever faults they have and whatever egregious errors they’ve made in the past, they are still subject to review by their peers and professional organizations and that means a lot to them. Even if they bury corrections at the bottom of page 33, they still make corrections, which cannot be said of any of the agenda-driven websites.Find two sources you know you can trust from past experience for any story you want to question…all the better if the sources have dissimilar takes on things.Follow The Nobby Works upcoming series on Logical Fallacies or research them on your own.  A working understanding of what logical fallacies are is the best tool you can have for sorting through the bullshit.