What Are Primary Sources of Information?
A primary source of information is a verifiable original source. An original source is “raw” unfiltered, uninterpreted information that comes directly from the person or group that produced it. This could include official records and documents, news videos of a speaker, recorded interviews, recorded speeches, original scientific or political publications, newspaper articles, autobiographies, verifiable meeting notes, and so on. In contrast, a secondary source is a primary source derivative, which interprets, evaluates, analyzes, or synthesizes information from primary sources.
Possibly the most important primary source of U.S. political information are congressional bills and U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) rulings. You can read U.S. Congressional bills online: U.S. House Legislation or U.S. Senate Legislation or GovTrack.us, which lets you easily find bills and resolutions in Congress. You can also read state legislature bills online: Congress.gov. You can read Supreme Court argument transcripts online.
PolitiFact, Fact Check, Snopes, or Fact Checker articles typically reference primary sources that you can read, along with an assessment of the source’s validity. For this reason, reading these sources would be superior to listening to “talk radio,” Fox News, or unsubstantiated pundits’ opinions. Reading these sources’ articles doesn’t require as much time as reading congressional bills or SCOTUS transcripts.
Congressional members’ statements made on the floor of the senate or house are also a primary sources of information because they’re recorded and verifiable. Compare these statements with how this information is represented in public statements made by the same congressional members, various pundits, talk radio, political blogs, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, and others. Are they consistent?
It’s true: Informing yourself with primary sources requires more time and effort than a quick listen to sound-bite news summaries, pundits’ opinions, political ads, hearsay, and so on—all secondary or tertiary sources, subject to misinterpretation; bias by omission, beliefs, or distortion; and since 2008, sometimes Orwellian lies (where the opposite of the primary source is asserted as fact).
Is it worth taking the time? Yes, because you get the facts, plus you can take the time to digest and critically think about these facts—and then take well-informed action and vote for your best interests and America’s best interests.
Recognize long-term legislative patterns, which can reveal agendas
You can learn for yourself about Republican, Democrat or other agendas. Just read summaries of the bills that are introduced over a long enough period of time, and a pattern or agenda will emerge. Reading these bills informs you of the longer-term agenda that will likely be legislated if one party has control of Congress (House and Senate)—even more so, if the President represents the same party that has control of Congress. Whatever the agenda is, you need to read enough, over a long enough period of time in order to understand what the patterns are—and that means staying up to date with new bills as they are introduced. For example, following Republican bills (and those that were blocked) since 2008 produces a pattern or trajectory that more or less predicted “Trumpism.” Following Republican bills, state and federal, since 1980 more or less predicted the repeal of Roe v Wade.
Learn about the U.S. president’s or a state governor’s political agenda—the goals s/he wants to achieve while in office—and compare that agenda with the congressional support for or blocking of bills supported by that governor or POTUS. By reading congressional voting records, learn which congress members helped or hindered achieving those goals.
Being factually informed does require your time, effort and critical-thinking skills. Learn the facts, inform others, and VOTE for your own and America’s best interests every election, both midterm and general.
Be a factually informed voter
Facts are not the same as opinions, propaganda, disinformation or “alternative facts” (definitions from Merriam-Webster and Slang Dictionary)
opin·ion : 1: a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge 2: belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge.
prop•a•gan•da : derogatory information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
dis·in·for·ma·tion : false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth.
Alternative facts (slang) have been called many things: falsehoods, untruths, delusions. A fact is something that actually exists—what we would call “reality” or “truth.” An alternative is one of the choices in a set of given options; typically the options are opposites of each other. So to talk about alternative facts is to talk about the opposite of reality (which is delusion), or the opposite of truth (which is untruth).
fact, noun : something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence a true piece of information.
Primary sources of information are the best defense against popular, but false, opinions, propaganda, disinformation, and “alternative facts”. And it’s true: Informing oneself from primary sources requires more time and effort than a quick listen to sound-bite news summaries.
Why is it worth it? Because, rather than pundits’ opinions, you get the facts—and can take well-informed action.