During a recent conversation I was having, the other party matter-of-factly mentioned that Hillary Clinton “killed Monica Lewinski’s dog and hung it outside of her house as a threat.” This took me by surprise. You would think that more people would have a problem with voting for a dog-killer as president. You’d think she would be questioned about that more often, right? I’m not saying this didn’t happen because I have no evidence to prove otherwise, but what I am saying is that if somebody is making statements like this, they should really have a source to back it up. Was this some off-the-cuff speculation that this guy picked up on while watching a conservative news network that he's now pawning off as fact? Or did he verify the information through a reliable source? (Doubtful.)

How many times have you seen a tabloid cover in the grocery store claim things that are so bizarre that you have to laugh? I’m sure you just rolled your eyes and went on your way. But now the same type of thing is happening for news articles we access online, especially with the help of Facebook and Twitter. The catchier the headline and the more scandalous the story, the more likely people are to share it with their entire network. This is unavoidable. People will continue fabricating “facts” and writing articles, and there will always be others that respond by sharing without further investigation. We have a very rare opportunity in the United States. We have a wealth of information, and we have the right to investigate on our own terms. We are given multiple perspectives, and it is our job to find the truth somewhere in there.

As media consumers, we do have the power to fact-check. We also have the power to point out when something is incorrect and let other people know (while also citing our sources). We do not need to believe everything major news networks tell us, either. In a recent study, it was found that 20% of “facts” on CNN were found to be incorrect (whereas 80% were found to be at least “half true” or better.) Fox News was even higher with 60% of information being found to be fabricated.

It should come as no surprise that people are going to believe what they want to believe. If someone already has a doctrine of ideas and values and Fox News reinforces those for them, it is very likely that they will continue to watch without question. I’m not saying we should necessarily be arguing with these people. At a certain point, some people make a choice about what they believe: they have no interest in seeing the other side and trying to disagree with them will just create frustration for everyone. All we can do as individuals is look deeper. Look beyond the so-called facts that are being presented to us and try to uncover the source. Sometimes, there won’t be one. But before you go believing myths of dog-slaughter in politics, consider where your information is coming from.