By the same token though, I think a lot of times the official story does not represent the entire picture. I think about people like Joe Arpaio, the sheriff in Arizona who's had prisoners go on hunger strikes. If you read the news it's because he started serving vegetarian meals. But if you watch videos where they interview the prisoners and tour the facility, you see that it's because the food looks like vomit and is purposely designed to be as unpleasant as possible while saving money. It's not unreasonable to get worked up and ask questions about cruel and unusual punishment when there are legitimate stories of prisoners shoes melting because they are being housed is 145°F conditions.

I think that's the most frustrating thing about the amount of information available today. It's very difficult to sift through it when there's so much spin and so few responsible news agencies that try to represent the issue factually. When you get to larger issues like Ukraine and the protests around the world, it becomes practically impossible for the average person to understand the motivations and all the different elements. I'm reminded of the protests in Venezuela where most major news outlets were simply saying "the protests turned violent" without trying to address why they turned violent, and who was perpetrating the violence. Couple that with the Venezuelan government actively suppressing reporters and disabling communication and the picture becomes very difficult to understand at a distance.