I think what people are really crying out for is simple information they can trust when they're bombarded by attack ads, fundraising pitchers and all sort of comment and opinion all over the place increasingly.
My personal sources in the intelligence community and the military are very good. They're excellent. I have very high-up, in-depth sources.
Even though intense focus on Iran's nuclear program has presumably increased the volume of intelligence gathered about it, it remains true that intelligence officers tend to rely heavily on a few trusted sources.
I have a mentor. I have... guides. I have a lot of guides. Not a lot, but people whose opinions I really respect and who I will turn to.
Be careful who you get advice from. I get advice from people who are where I want to be.
The best advice I get is actually from my family and friends. That has been a huge resource I've come to rely on.
The problem is that there is no reliable source of information left, no way to accumulate trusted accounts of the plusses and minuses of any given political choice.
Readable text and authority so that readers know how to spend - no matter how much information there is, I have the same number of minutes in my day, and I need to look to sources that I trust.
You need to have the advice from experienced people coming from different kinds of educational and backgrounds in general, and then you can make a decision. But you need people around you that you trust to give you advice, and you need to make sure that the facts of the case are presented.
In Washington, no one believes anything unless it comes from 'The New Yorker,' 'New York Times' editorial page, or 'The Washington Post.'
The area we define as what Quora's good at is long-form text that's useful over time, and where you care about who wrote the text. Not that you need to be friends with them, just that they're someone trustworthy.
The people you're friends with on Facebook or the people you follow on Twitter are trusted sources of information.
I feel like the majority of the fear that I had or that we have we hold from other people. They're like people that we trust; they're their fears. All of a sudden we think that they're our fears.
Among the most disheartening and dangerous of . . . advisors, you will often find those closest to you, your dearest friends, members of your own family, perhaps, loving, anxious, and knowing nothing whatever . . .
Don't forget: when you start a website, it's not yet a trusted site. So you have to bring people from a trusted site to your site to build up the trust in your site.
I would suggest that you only take advice from those people who have a lot of experience and who you trust as well. Also, be extremely conservative with your investments.
I have some friends, most of them are writers or editors, whose recommendations I trust blindly. There are some critics, too, whom I trust, but not many.
In making up my mind as to what Mr. Lincoln really believed, I do not take into consideration the evidence of unnamed persons or the contents of anonymous letters; I take the testimony of those who knew and loved him, of those to whom he opened his heart and to whom he spoke in the freedom of perfect confidence.
We are rather in the position that used to exist at the BBC, where you feel that you can pick up the phone to people who are experts in their field and they will be very favourably disposed to you and share their knowledge.
What magazines do is curate: we give accurate and trustworthy information. If you have a problem, it's very difficult to go to the web and get accurate information... magazines, at their best, should be an incredible voyage of discovery.
Obviously, the opinions that are most accurate are the ones that are closest to you - your crew, your friends, your family. Those people know who you are, and that's accurate.
Nobody is infallible, but it is important to have trusted guides when it comes to information.
