Media Accuracy, Media Bias, and Media Trends

Credible information: why it matters, what are its limitations -- Fake news as phenomenon: (almost) nothing new under the sun -- Tricks of the trade: techniques that lower your information guard -- Logical fallacies: more tools of deception -- Evaluating an information source: nine essential questions everyone should ask -- Power in numbers: negotiating the statistics minefield -- Scholarly information: identifying, evaluating, and understanding it

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
List of "231 of the most common fallacies" and "brief explanations and examples of each of them."

Covers: Missing the point, Post hoc (false cause), Slippery slope, Weak analogy, Appeal to authority, Ad populum, Ad hominem and tu quoque, Appeal to pity, Appeal to ignorance, Straw man, Red herring, False dichotomy, Begging the question, and Equivocation.

Chapter from book: Knachel, M. (2017). Fundamental Methods of Logic. A.T. Still University.
Chapter 2 - Informal Logical Fallacies -- I. Logical Fallacies: Formal and Informal -- II. Fallacies of Distraction -- III. Fallacies of Weak Induction -- IV. Fallacies of Illicit Presumption -- V. Fallacies of Linguistic Emphasis

Chapter in "Critical Thinking in Psychology"

Twelve fallacies outlined: Slippery Slope, Hasty Generalization, Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Genetic Fallacy, Begging the Claim, Circular Argument, Either/or, Ad hominem, Ad populem / Bandwagon Appeal, Red Herring, Straw Man, and Moral Equivalence.

Chapter in the book: Swanson, T. A., & Jagman, H. (Eds.). (2015). Not just where to click : teaching students how to think about information . Swanson and Heather Jagman. American Library Association.

Thinking, critically -- Evaluating numbers. Plausibility ; Fun with averages ; Axis shenanigans ; Hijinks with how numbers are reported ; How numbers are collected ; Probabilities -- Evaluating words. How do we know? ; Identifying expertise ; Overlooked, undervalued alternative explanations ; Counterknowledge -- Evaluating the world. How science works ; Logical fallacies ; Knowing what you don't know ; Bayesian thinking in science and in court