I agree Nye has fought for years to tell the truth and outside of personal relation issues he has been attacked by name calling and blunt refutations. Thanks for having the courage to fight though the adversity.
Here is a list a whistleblower has written about media attempts to debunk conspiracies which are true.
Obviously there is much false information on the internet and there are many conspiracy nuts I'm not refuting that but here are tactics used to discredit a person or group seeking to expose the truth. I don't suggest any one use feelings, common sense, or folk wisdom to solve financial, legal and politcal crimes but evidence and facts it seems to help to look at a historical overview it surprising how financial and politcal criminals keep reusing the same old tricks.
The main point is the scam artist must build as much credibility as possible and discredit those seeking to expose the scams by whatever means neccessary.
Subtly or not so subtly intimidate anyone who might be open to the possibility of a conspiracy by questioning the mental state of conspiracy advocates and pretending they are outcasts of society whose opinions nobody cares about.
Put the word "theory" behind the word "conspiracy", no matter how great the evidence, and preferably do this several times in the article to make the (supposedly) theoretical nature of the conspiracy really sink in.
Imply that conspiracy theories are literally made up out of thin air and that there never was any significant evidence to support any of them.
Present different pieces of the same conspiracy as independently made up and conflicting conspiracy theories.
Carefully select the evidence that is to be presented. Leave out anything that cannot be explained. Focus on evidence that is easy to discredit, or at the very least, inconclusive.
As a talk-show host, don't let any person arguing in favor of a conspiracy speak uninterrupted for even one minute.
For interviews, preferably pick prominent individuals from the conspiracy movement who either have no credentials or irrelevant credentials. Place these conspiracy theorists against academics and other experts who have impeccable credentials.
During video interviews, allow the skeptics to present themselves more properly than the conspiracy advocates.
Quote from generally respected government investigating committees and present their conclusions as gospel.
Automatically dismiss articles from conspiracy advocates as "unreliable", no matter how well-sourced these articles are.
Always question the motives of conspiracy theorists.
Make the well known claim that everybody is in on the conspiracy.
Make a few jokes, usually involving little green men, Elvis, the grassy knoll, and aliens. Then there also is the classic "out to get you" comment.
Ask if the conspiracy advocate believes in any other (unrelated) conspiracies.
Make the claim that governments can't keep secrets.
Repeat the claim that we have free press because scandals are regularly exposed.
As soon as a conspiracy theorist brings up witness testimony, counter with the standard argument that eyewitness testimony is "notoriously unreliable".
When aspects of the permanent government have slowly been exposed over the years, oversimplify by stating this or that conspiracy theory "has had its best time".
Start out with, or only report, conclusions, and leave out most, if not all, evidence that this conclusion has been based on. Also leave out all nuances brought up by the person that has been interviewed.
Oversimplify by stating that the official head of state must have been directly involved in planning and overseeing the conspiracy. Don't allow the subject to explain the transnational, largely privatized, permanent government in any coherent way.
Claim that the internet is responsible for the recent increase in conspiracy theories, because frothing conspiracy theorists are hyping each other up in chat rooms and message boards.
Have a conspiracy theorist argue with a victim of a conspiracy who actually doesn't believe in the conspiracy. Even better, the victim is disabled and dying.
When covering demonstrations, mainly focus on the eccentric and the violent. Ignore all the presentable, calm and intelligent demonstrators.
Don't write about the topics conspiracy theorists bring up. Instead, write about conspiracy theorists.
See if you can link credible writers to not-so-credible writers.
See if you can dig up some dirt on a prominent conspiracy advocate.