It seems smartest and safest to go the content/logic route. Of course that means you have to understand the argument in greater detail, and I'll definitely admit to relying on a lot of sources who I generally trust to know what they are talking about when I don't know a lot of details about the subject. I'm thinking things like science and whatnot, things where there are specialists whose job it is to know about that one thing they know about.
But still, overall, content is what will feel more convincing to me because I instinctively distrust anyone who says something is what it is just because they say so.