Question: Being that we live in a 24/7 media saturated landscape, claims of of "fake news", "conspiracy", and "post truth" are commonplace across the political spectrum. The website infowars.com is increasingly invoked within such discussions. Thus, our task is to determine whether or not such a source deserves intellectual merit or scorn.

Using infowars for this discussion exercise is intended to be provocative by raising controversial issues. It being utilized here should not be interpreted as being an implicit endorsement or rejection of the positions expressed. It was chosen based on the potential to evoke a critical response.

With that in mind, please visit the infowars website in the above link and peruse some of the stories as well as its design. Post a brief critical analysis of the stories being presented and whether or not you observe them presenting a reliable impression of the world at large. What themes are present? How is this information being presented and how does it affect your experience of it? How are your biases and assumptions toward this website possibly affecting your analysis? Most importantly, what is the difference between knowing something and believing something? Provide suggestions for interpretation and response.