A few weeks ago I got an email from a long-time reader in response to this post: Considering your source?
The email asked, I think, a good question: With so much information out there, often contradictory, how does one determine which sources are reliable, and which ones aren't? It's a good, legitimate question, and not always easy to determine. So, with some thought, I've put together a few thoughts on how people should think about sources in deteriming whether or not they are reliable.
#1) Anonymous sources are not reliable. If someone is not willing to put their real name behind their point of view then their opinion is not worth your time to consider. Knowledgable people put their names on their ideas. Trolls remain anonymous. Don't feed the trolls.
That's my list of how I look at sources. Anything else you'd add?