Regardless of who or where you hear something from - the media, the internet, political discussion with others, etc. - if you weren't there, you don't know if it is true. So, every time you receive information second-hand or third-hand, you are basically making a decision whether to believe it or not. Being a "conspiracy theorist" simply means that you choose to believe an alternative collection of stories to the ones that are popularly accepted. That doesn't make you somehow more intelligent by default than a person who tends to believe the media. Sometimes the media presents stories that sound stupid and outlandish that could be completely true, sometimes those same stories can be completely false. "Conspiracy theories" are the same - some are outlandish and stupid and are false fearmongering, sometimes they are true, but unless you were there to witness the important meetings and events that led to the situation transpiring, all you are doing is placing faith into one set of second- or third- hand interpretations of events over others.
By the way, you say you hate the term, but you didn't offer an alternative. "Conspiracy theory" seems like a very accurate way to describe them - because they are theories about cover-up conspiracies that must have transpired for the story to not reach the media, and for a media-friendly version of the events to be put in their place (or no version whatsoever in a true cover-up).
