Sorting through the allegations

Many of our supporters have asked us how it is that we can somehow get to the heart of the issues the way we do without getting bogged down in conspiracy theories or unimportant tangents. Karen Hartford of Athens, Georgia, stated well what many of our readers have been saying since we started this blog:

"When I browse the web I know I am apt to find unreliable information, but I never have that concern while browsing your blog. I have never once felt misinformed or underinformed about the big issues threatening our society. I wish I knew how you cut through all of the rumors and allegations out there so that other bloggers could be as informative as you are."

We are glad that you find our service informative and helpful, and will do our best to explain how we do it so that others can imitate us more fully. Before we do that, however, we would like to point to an example of how investigation can get easily confused. While the article is an interesting read about several conspiracy theories related to the disappearance of the Arctic Sea cargo ship, it does not help the user to understand what actually happened. The fact that the author may not know is irrelevant, as in many cases people would rather be told what to believe than be given the facts and asked to reach their own conclusions. Without further ado, then, here are our guidelines for better persuasive blogging:

1. Be honest about your own fallibility. Occasionally make rash decisions or make mistakes. This will give an air of authenticity to your posts and will make people believe you more often.
   
2. If you don't know the answer, either guess or make one up. People like it when you tell them things, not when you tell them you don't know things.
3. When short of sources, say things like "everyone know that macaroni was invented in Ireland" or "since people prefer balloon animals to pork and beans." Invoking general knowledge makes people who don't agree with you feel like they are in the minority.

We could go on, but since lists of things for people to improve on generally become less effective after three items, we'll let it stay there. At the GNU Public Dictatorship we are nothing if not helpful!