So, I wrote a reply last week, but have been sitting on it because I wondered if it hijacked the thread. Basically, I got stuck in reflection on the concept of being “credible”. That is, while I do highly value credibility, in this age of sharp political polarization and a glaring lack of trust in public institutions, I wanted to acknowledge the complexity of the issue .
First off, I noticed that you and others pointed out that there are two levels we would do well to reflect on in our social media interactions:
- relational
- informational
And, as Carson mentioned, these two are inevitably intertwined. If I am coming across as abrasive, callous, rude, or ungracious in my interactions, then chances are slim that people will engage in depth with any ideas I may post. Conversely, if the information I post seems dodgy, then conclusions will be drawn about my character (or, perhaps, rational state) even if my other interactions are “unceasingly polite and kind”.
I find this frustrating, but not surprising.
As Christians, I believe that part of glorifying God is seeking to be a credible witness as best as we are able. However, we need to recognize that we cannot be always credible to all the people all the time. That’s impossible because credibility is a subjective concept. That is, it runs through the interpretive frame/filter of a person, and there are all sorts of things that go into the creation of a single person’s interpretive lens. That is why one person’s reputable source is another’s propaganda. One person’s “conspiracy theory” or “misinformation” is another’s plausible story.
I find the tweet you mentioned difficult to engage with, Carson. I mean, perhaps there is some truth in it. Just getting on Facebook for couple of minutes can confirm that, which I find demoralizing (and, yes, worth reflecting on!). But this tweet is in the same vein as all that other vapid noise coming from both extremes, and I rather doubt there would be much of anything that could compel this particular person to take the Easter announcement seriously.
Furthermore,
I hope I’m not allowing my cynicism to get the best of me, but I would reply, imagine if objectively “reputable, fact-checked information” existed in America. 
I do agree that fact-checking is possible and that some sources are more reputable than others, but not everyone will agree on what those sources are. Perhaps we ought to begin with noting extreme sources? Perhaps we ought to be looking for data sets and interpretive frameworks? We all have a filter. Perhaps we need to acknowledge first the subjectivity of “credible” in order to move towards an agreed upon/objective criteria for credibility?
As for the credibility of our Easter celebrations, my question for personal reflection is: How connected to my life is Easter? That is, to the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus? Is Easter Day merely a special Sunday where we wear special clothing, eat a special meal, hunt plastic eggs, and, if the timing is right, take a nap with the Master’s golf tournament on in the background? As nice as that sounds, it seems to be merely this thing that comes round every year, rather than a deeply meaningful event that changed the course of history…and changes my life.
And if my life isn’t changed, how credible is my witness anyway? 