What's the best practice on dealing with this problem?
Just don't be naive.
How should one inform oneself and decide on how much time to spend on cross-checking communications for these conscious or unconscious biases and influences?
Take in everything you read, but don't believe any of it unless it's a primary source or someone who you personally find trustworthy. Choose your battles wisely. You won't get to the bottom of everything because life is short.
In short, the best defense is being skeptical but still entertaining of everything you hear/read.
I do sometimes wonder where all these strawmen you find are who go around believing everything they read without passing it through their own internal bullshit filters. These people must be massive clods, barely able to make it through the day without throwing away all their money on television informercials. Even some of the least intelligent people I have ever known have notions of "some info good, some info bad," even if I usually disagree with which is which.
> In short, the best defense is being skeptical but still entertaining of everything you hear/read.
Except you just said journalism is dead and everything we hear and read is thought control.
Every time I hear someone rallying against these complete simpletons which they seem to think they are surrounded by, I can't shake the feeling they're just shouting at a mirror.
Just don't be naive.
How should one inform oneself and decide on how much time to spend on cross-checking communications for these conscious or unconscious biases and influences?
Take in everything you read, but don't believe any of it unless it's a primary source or someone who you personally find trustworthy. Choose your battles wisely. You won't get to the bottom of everything because life is short.
In short, the best defense is being skeptical but still entertaining of everything you hear/read.