Originally Posted by PHAEDRUS242

I guess it's the percentages that really tell the tale. Yeah, a lot of what have been historically considered "credible" news sources have made some pretty large mistakes. By and large they are accurate in their reporting. I don't think you can compare a source that nails it 95% (hypothetical number) of the time to a Matt Drudge or an Art Bell (who was a lot of fun when he was around) who is just as likely to be dead wrong about something as they are right. I think that's what determines credibility, and that is something that has to be earned over time. Derrick Lee still strikes out, but he does it a hell of a lot less than Corey Patterson. They're both swinging a bat, just one is consistently more dependable at delivering favorable results. It's the same thing with Drudge. He's right on some things, and can be days ahead of traditional news sources, but I would not feel comfortable putting a lot of stock in something he reports until it is verified by other news sources.