During my first history course in college, we immediately learned the difference between “primary sources” and “secondary sources”. Primary ones are original communications that took place at the time the history occurred–speeches, writings, art, video, and so on. Secondary sources are interpretations and summaries made by other people describing the history taking place. You can probably guess which sources are more reliable. If you’re examining primary sources, you’re using your own judgement to learn & interpret the historical event. With secondary sources, information is subject to the biases, double standards, corruption, and inaccuracies of the people doing the interpreting.
Nowadays, Americans receive almost all their information from secondary sources, including events taking place in modern times, which explains why so much of the nation has a distorted view of events. Students get their history information from communist-leaning/anti-capitalist textbooks and professors. Citizens get their current information from a Trump-hating corrupt media. EVERY DAY during the Trump presidency there have been multiple hit pieces that distort news involving Trump, usually involving some quote that is clipped out of context. Fair-minded people will find the whole quote and quickly see how dishonest the secondary sources of the media are.
Take for example his recent Independence Day speech at Mt. Rushmore. Virtually every mainstream media source called it divisive, dark, racist, scary, etc. If you relied on these biased, distorted secondary sources for information, you may believe it. Now examine a primary source and read the actual transcript of the speech. Do you agree with the media’s assessment?