Are we presenting opinions or facts?

SGT Ben Keen It comes down to how each individual processes the information that they receive. I can usually tell when something is fact or an opinion, based on my individual perception. Again, my perception could be skewed or wrong. The problem with the actual news is they make opinions seem like fact - I know that is the opposite of what I just said above, but that is where each individual needs to review and process the information as clearly as possible. I've been lazy in some instances only reading the first couple of paragraphs in a headline, making an assumption based on what I partially read and then missed some important facts. I think happens allot to many people. People are in a big hurry these days and I believe they only process have the information or storyline they hear or read. When it comes to RallyPoint I can usually tell opinion(s) (because a lot of members let us know that it is just their opinion) versus information provided from SMEs to other individuals asking for facts. I agree with you that the "spin factor" is definitely influencing individuals in our society in one way or another, so we need to be careful and try to read between the lines as best we can. I don't think there is an immediate fix to the difference between "Opinions or Facts". Again, this is just my opinion on your question. I'm not an expert on media commentary and the psychological affects it has on the public in general

Any forum such as RP is open debate and for some conjecture, thus inviting opinions which spur quality interaction/discussion. I trust with the quality of the audience on RP the vast majority of opinions are based on facts rather than unfounded speculation.

SGT Ben Keen, great post! I think it is nearly impossible to actually fully separate fact and opinion. I would even argue that at least to some extent, facts become worthless without (educated) opinions.

In recent events, there are actually very few hard facts we have to go on when broken down. We will never be able to say 100% what the shooter was thinking, what led to his actions, where the turning point was. Even if he had a highly detailed diary, his own ability to convey his thoughts, and unknown imbalances in his brain, would skew what was written on paper. If you've ever been in an English class, you know that words can be interpreted in many different ways, depending on who is reading them (seriously, where does all that symbolism come from?). Similarly, we cannot evaluate the scenario and properly predict the correct course of action for the next incident. Will the next shooter use the same weapon? Will his end goal be the same? Will the distraction of trying to prevent this scenario actually open up other avenues of attack while the focus is concentrated on recruiting stations? We can only form educated opinions on likely causes, and likely solutions moving forward.

This can also apply to the Presidential race. We have very few actual facts to go on, even with our current President. Sure, we have unemployment numbers and the deficit, but looking at raw numbers is hardly useful, as they don't occur in a vacuum. We need educated opinions from those smarter than us in their field that explain the why and how these numbers exist at their current levels. The best option we have is to form opinions on which candidate's strategy moving forward will LIKELY have the most positive impact. Until their term has come to pass, there are no actual facts to base our votes on.

So what can we do? Form more opinions, of course! None of us can be experts in everything, so we need to form our own opinions on who we will trust to inform us. In our opinion, does the Harvard Economics professor likely have a background developed enough to catch the minor details of the current climate, and form a likely hypothesis for the years to come? Does the retired General guest speaker have enough real experience at the right level to weigh in on foreign policy? More importantly, are these men and women in positions where they can appear on television or in print and speak freely, without a political or personal agenda guiding which words they share and which they hold private?

Personally, I try to stay "educated" by watching/reading news sources that I know often conflict. If CNN, Fox, and MSNBC all report on the same story, I like to analyze where they actually find agreement. If it is a major issue that impacts my personal vote, I then take those basic issues and see what the "people on the streets" have to say. Those who are experts in their field, but who haven't been called on by anyone to make a formal opinion.