The reason this topic interests me is an event from about thirty years ago, that frequently comes to mind. When he was Secretary of State, or soon thereafter, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote a book, and I read a book review about it. The author was extremely knowledgeable, and extremely critical. He provided citations directly opposite to what Brz had written. Then I read the book itself. The critic's astounding knowledge base had come entirely from Brzezinski's own footnotes, in which he had provided the contrary authorities.

There was just no way to detect this fraud as a mere reader. I blame(d) the magazine editors. But I guess it leads to this simple fact: You always have to read original source materials for any matter of any importance. Perhaps that is another related indicator, though, in addition to dramatic language, stridency, and the use of superlatives: intense criticism.