Fortunately, a bunch of articulate "nuts" have challenged this Times piece. Guess who? Times readers . The response comments are full of thoughtful rebuttals. (By the way, we think New York Times readers who abhor that kind of manipulation would welcome the work we do at WhoWhatWhy but perhaps have not heard of our site. When you post intelligent, measured comments over on the Times site, feel free to mention and link to us.)
A Simple Solution
In order to understand who is a crazy conspiracy theorist, you first have to understand which theories are crazy, and which are valid -- and that requires a knowledge of current events and history apparently beyond the ken of the likes of Koerth-Baker. Without such knowledge, you're in no position to assess whether a perceived conspiracy might be real or not. Example: if you don't know that John Wilkes Booth had accomplices in the death of Abraham Lincoln, you would judge as bonkers a statement that at least one American president was in fact killed by a conspiracy.
It is not clear whether Koerth-Baker is truly ignorant of these issues--or just wants to help the New York Times keep you ignorant. In any case, when it comes to understanding how the powerful stay powerful, we clearly need fewer critiques of members of the public who ask questions -- and a lot more studies of the facts themselves.
See GRAPHIC Info here.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
3
