How Do You Respond to Misinformation?

In general, this is a question we all have to deal with on a daily basis. With the normalization of the internet and the increase in potential media inputs, it stands to reason that we all have more information than we need really. But is any of this information reliable? Between Twitter, Facebook, blogs, and even TV and ancient media like radio, one is faced with a wide range of potentially conflicting information. Which inputs are reliable and which can be brushed aside? It is sometimes difficult to make this type of determination. It begins with the assumption that we ourselves have access to correct information upon which to base our conclusions about new inputs. Can I trust any news website? (Hint: No.) Ultimately, we all develop our own filter for evaluating information that we read or hear. Ideally, after a lot of exposure to a given topic we can develop a reliable filter. Maybe even an informed filter. Even if we still cannot say which input is right or wrong, we can at least identify the perspective and viewpoint of a given input.

I would like to think that I have developed a well-informed filter when it comes to a few specific topics, two of these being Celiac disease and the gluten free diet in general. I have read enough medical journal articles, specialized magazines, books, and professional blogs to develop a fairly advanced filter for accurate and inaccurate information. Even if I am not a medical specialist, I can sniff out when a source is somehow not entirely trustworthy. And of course, a lot of information is easily searched out on the internet. So, if someone tweets, "Red Stripe beer is gluten free," I can search the internet and find out pretty quickly that this is false and that perhaps the person meant to tweet Redbridge instead.

All this introduction to ask, what is the appropriate response to incorrect information, whether in print or online? With the Twitter example of Red Stripe, it is rather easy to respond on Twitter and correct the information. In this case I would hate to have someone drink a Red Stripe and react negatively to the gluten content. But, what about other cases where the information is more complex or controversial. For example, every week or so it seems I see an online post about the dangers of using creams, shampoos, and other external products that contain gluten. Immediately, my filter sets off a red blinking light. I think, "Now wait, my understanding is that the negative side effects of gluten intolerance are triggered by ingesting gluten." At first, I doubt myself. Then, I recover my certainty and realize that the person posting this information is either confused or has done a poor job explaining themselves. Either they are talking about a gluten allergy and have confused this with Celiac disease, or they read an unreliable source and accepted it as fact. Ok. So then what is the next step? Do I go through the entire process of explaining the difference between a gluten allergy and Celiac disease? Do I post a response on this person's blog? Sadly, I'm usually too lazy or busy to respond and I just move one.

Thoughts?