user109: When reading chess articles or watching videos online, my criteria for often determining if it is worth reading or watching is if it is made my someone with a FIDE title (IM, FM, GM, etc), but what other criteria should I use to determine if someone or something is worth reading or watching?
Some that I can think of myself are:

The author of the article/video has a FIDE title.
The website where articles or videos are found has a large following.
The author is relatively widely known even if they don't have a FIDE title.

Also, are there any red flags that should indicate that if I watch or read this, I probably will get incorrect/stale information?

user1105: Here are some ideas about whether or not a source can be trusted.
-Not all titled players are good in teaching.
-Chess.com is great because its members are excellent chess players and will not allow a poor article or video to be published.
-chess.about.com is good because it hires professional people, but not as good as chess.com
-thechesswebsite.com is great because kevin (the man behind the site) has many subscribers on youtube, kingcrucher is another great youtube channel because it offers in depth analysis, but they focus too much on blitz.
and then you have Roman's lab, Roman is the greatest chess teacher of all time.
What else do you have? When looking at books, you can check the Amazon rating and reviews.

109: <p>When reading chess articles or watching videos online, my criteria for often determining if it is worth reading or watching is if it is made my someone with a FIDE title (IM, FM, GM, etc), but what other criteria should I use to determine if someone or something is worth reading or watching?</p>

<p>Some that I can think of myself are:</p>

<ul>
<li>The author of the article/video has a FIDE title.</li>
<li>The website where articles or videos are found has a large following.</li>
<li>The author is relatively widely known even if they don't have a FIDE title.</li>
</ul>

<p>Also, are there any red flags that should indicate that if I watch or read this, I probably will get incorrect/stale information?</p>
 1105: <p>Here are some ideas about whether or not a source can be trusted.</p>
<p>-Not all titled players are good in teaching.</p>
<p>-<a href="http://chess.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Chess.com</a> is great because its members are excellent chess players and will not allow a poor article or video to be published.</p>
<p>-<a href="http://chess.about.com" rel="nofollow noreferrer">chess.about.com</a> is good because it hires professional people, but not as good as chess.com</p>
<p>-<a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/thechesswebsite" rel="nofollow noreferrer">thechesswebsite.com</a> is great because kevin (the man behind the site) has many subscribers on youtube, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/kingscrusher" rel="nofollow noreferrer">kingcrucher</a> is another great youtube channel because it offers in depth analysis, but they focus too much on blitz.</p>
<p>and then you have <a href="http://www.chesscentral.com/chess_dvd_roman_s/40.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Roman's lab</a>, Roman is the greatest chess teacher of all time.</p>
<p>What else do you have? When looking at books, you can check the Amazon rating and reviews.</p>
