Since when is someone's independant internet musings supposed to enough to convince someone of a fact rather than an opinion? Could a blog be used as concrete evidence in a trial? Can you look a blog up in an encyclopedia? Can you even really prove who wrote the blog most of the time?
2007-12-29 15:08:44 · 8 answers · asked by Sarah the Unready 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I think some of the readers don't always recognize that the blog carries information that is not always vetted properly.
The unfortunate thing is that often the blog is simply linking to a story from a legitimate news source. It would be very simple to link to the actual news item with a little more research.
2007-12-29 15:16:09 · answer #1 · answered by mickbw 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good point. I agree that a blog containing a personal opinion does not constitute as evidence for nothing. Keep in mind though that some blogs might have a well constructed argument that makes references to irrefutable facts or validated opinions and so it's much easier for the person responding to indicate the blog as a source than trying to find the original source.
2007-12-29 23:14:44 · answer #2 · answered by Filipe F 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They leave things that support their point of view. And they don't think anyone is going to check their "sources" and find out they are merely blogs instead of fact-based sites. I think they feel that everyone will be swayed to their viewpoint if they have numerous sources listed that backs what they are saying, and since they feel no one is going to check them out, they will be in awe of the number.
Usually, the first time I hit a blog as a source, I think the person is a moron for listing an opinion to support an argument for their view being "fact". If they can't tell the difference, then they really can't argue their way out of a wet paperbag.
2007-12-29 23:20:54 · answer #3 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because the entirety of this forum is based in an absolute mockery of debate. A blog isn't anything special as a source, and neither are most youtube videos, which are also rather common. Actual sources aren't necessary when people are spending their time shouting their opinions rather than arguing on an intellectual level.
2007-12-29 23:14:51 · answer #4 · answered by whiteflame55 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree that blogs are not a good source of objective evidence but to be fair some intelligent people have blogs with actual references of objective fact. So i guess if the blog is from a reputable source or if it has legitimate, reputable sources, then it can be considered as legitimate as evidence.
2007-12-29 23:25:42 · answer #5 · answered by khsora23 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most times they are the only sites that support their point of view, like the 9/11 conspiracy nuts.
2007-12-29 23:12:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's even worse when they cite a You Tube video like it was a lost Gospel.
2007-12-29 23:16:12 · answer #7 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because they are stupid enough to believe EVERYTHING they read.
2007-12-29 23:11:39 · answer #8 · answered by Sordenhiemer 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋