They say x, ask for where they heard about x. They say from y news organization, ask the source for y. If they say z, if z is actually an actual document or otherwise, ask them where in z does y claim x is true.
If z is just another news organization, keep going until they provide (or don't provide) an actual document. If they can't procure an actual document, send it yourself. If z is just another video cIip, ask them for the whole video. Provide them the entire video if they can't.
Do not try to antagonize. Just simply ask the questions as if you were trying to understand their point of view, to learn something we might not have heard.
It's interesting that there's good/true and bad/false content on YT; both sides can be presented, for a chance to show them which videos depict the truth, but they only pick out what supports their erroneous argument. They go out of their way. Confirmation bias is the official term for that.
Someone on here posted a YT link to an Andrew Huberman video talking about dopamine so I watched the longer version because it blew my mind. One of the things that causes a dopamine spike is hearing information that reinforces your own beliefs. Very interesting considering how vehemently people will defend their own points of view instead on genuinely trying to discern the information and question their own beliefs. Like someone earlier said: they value obedience over courage. I would also say they value fitting in over personal integrity.
Agreed. I watch vids on YT, myself, but I was referring to self-limiting exposure, as you pointed out. There's a lot more out there than just cute kitten vids. For example, tons of documentaries, spiritual videos, how-to vids on dyi projects, that kind of stuff is great. But thank you for defining confirmation bias. I'd heard it before, but never really zeroed in on its meaning.