Hacker News Reader

If someone tells outright lies for a living, it is a useful heuristic to reject everything they say out of hand.

It marginalizes them and ostracizes them from civil society in precisely the way they deserve, and increases your likelihood of finding the truth.

Note: this is different from assuming the truth is the OPPOSITE of what they say.

> tells outright lies for a living

I'm not going to defend Alex Jones here, but surely you realise that this metric includes many main stream, "respected" media organisations?

I don't have time for your "they all do it" false equivalency.

I try to consume sources that generally do their best to get it right.

If you include any Murdoch property in that list, you need to revisit your list.

How so?