18 Feb 2017, 6:36 pm
18 Feb 2017, 6:38 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
With all the bashing of the mainstream media, how about labeling real fake news for what it is, such as:
Breitbart
Fox
The Drudge Report
Alex Jones
to name just a few.
All of which have exaggerated the truth, to telling out-and-out falsehoods. Or does their political ideology make them beyond reproach?
Breitbart
Fox
The Drudge Report
Alex Jones
to name just a few.
All of which have exaggerated the truth, to telling out-and-out falsehoods. Or does their political ideology make them beyond reproach?
Says the dedicated CNN watcher
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
18 Feb 2017, 7:01 pm
Jacoby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
With all the bashing of the mainstream media, how about labeling real fake news for what it is, such as:
Breitbart
Fox
The Drudge Report
Alex Jones
to name just a few.
All of which have exaggerated the truth, to telling out-and-out falsehoods. Or does their political ideology make them beyond reproach?
Breitbart
Fox
The Drudge Report
Alex Jones
to name just a few.
All of which have exaggerated the truth, to telling out-and-out falsehoods. Or does their political ideology make them beyond reproach?
Says the dedicated CNN watcher
How are any of the so called news sources I've listed not fake news?
androbot01
Veteran
Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
18 Feb 2017, 7:11 pm
18 Feb 2017, 7:14 pm
18 Feb 2017, 7:25 pm
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,637
Location: Long Island, New York
18 Feb 2017, 8:30 pm
Earthbound wrote:
Donald Trump has serious issues. He is STILL whining about how he should've won electoral votes. He's still praising himself for winning the election. He's not only a sore winner but an ego maniac. He is the freaking president now- he needs to grow up and deal with important issues for USA! Not his personal matters with the media. Not his business. Not his children's businesses either!
Here's some- clean up oil spills! There is a few at the least that haven't been cleaned up completely! Fix the water completely in Flint, Michigan. Fix the crime issues in various cities! Fix the issues with the dam in California and other related things.
Yes I realize all of those things take time- but the fact he would rather whine and moan about how media is bashing him, is petty and immature. Many of the times the media (not just mainstream) uses his EXACT QUOTES and he still whines about how it's fake news or just whines in general on how he is being treated. The media should NOT post positive things about his garbage, especially when he does something wrong. In Trump's mind he never does anything wrong and the media should just praise him non-stop 24/7.
The Republicans need to wake up and impeach this guy already. He's still in charge of his businesses and making profits off them. Go look it up- he just won some copyrights for stuff he is selling in China.
If people want to ignore that stuff, fine. Here's something that shouldn't be ignored- someone photographed the nuclear suitcase at Trump's club!
Also Trump the conman still hasn't released his taxes. Reporters need to start calling him out on it in every press conference. Bring up all the times he said he would do it- the footage is there! Call him out on his other lies- like "draining the swamp", which he really didn't do. He just made it worse with rich elite that care about big oil, money and not much else.
Here's some- clean up oil spills! There is a few at the least that haven't been cleaned up completely! Fix the water completely in Flint, Michigan. Fix the crime issues in various cities! Fix the issues with the dam in California and other related things.
Yes I realize all of those things take time- but the fact he would rather whine and moan about how media is bashing him, is petty and immature. Many of the times the media (not just mainstream) uses his EXACT QUOTES and he still whines about how it's fake news or just whines in general on how he is being treated. The media should NOT post positive things about his garbage, especially when he does something wrong. In Trump's mind he never does anything wrong and the media should just praise him non-stop 24/7.
The Republicans need to wake up and impeach this guy already. He's still in charge of his businesses and making profits off them. Go look it up- he just won some copyrights for stuff he is selling in China.
If people want to ignore that stuff, fine. Here's something that shouldn't be ignored- someone photographed the nuclear suitcase at Trump's club!
Also Trump the conman still hasn't released his taxes. Reporters need to start calling him out on it in every press conference. Bring up all the times he said he would do it- the footage is there! Call him out on his other lies- like "draining the swamp", which he really didn't do. He just made it worse with rich elite that care about big oil, money and not much else.
Republicans wake up? They are very up and know they are getting more of their decades long policy wish list to happen. "Never Trump" for the most part was all about their incorrect belief that Trump's ravings would result in a Democrat landslide, not moral objections to his "authoritarian" style. Now it is the inconvenience and annoyance of ass licking, excuse making, and minimizing. Object to his bullying the press? More like this is what they have been waiting for, for 45+ years. They have hated the media since the Vietnam era. They thought they had the press by the balls with Nixon and Agnew but the press had the last laugh.
18 Feb 2017, 10:57 pm
19 Feb 2017, 7:44 am
19 Feb 2017, 8:25 am
19 Feb 2017, 10:01 am
19 Feb 2017, 10:07 am
19 Feb 2017, 10:26 am
The_Walrus wrote:
I think there's quite a bit of confusion as to what constitutes "fake news", particularly among Trump supporters but also generally.
There's the ridiculous Trump definition, which is "anything which criticises me". There's the similarly ridiculous but less common definition, which is "news from outlets I don't like or presented in a way I don't like". And then there's the sensible original definition which has been overshadowed, publishers spreading hoaxes and disinformation with a deliberate attempt to mislead.
Reputable moderate outlets like CNN and the NYT might occasionally make mistakes, but they are reputable and achieve a level of accuracy which their loudest critics struggle with. Similarly, conservative outlets like the Daily Telegraph and the Chicago Tribune might not agree with you, but they're reputable, reliable, and broadly accurate - not "fake news". Then you have outlets like Fox and MSNBC, which lean a little towards being propaganda outlets but are still nearly always reporting on genuine events. Keep your brain attached and don't depend on them, but you can also be assured that what they say has some basis in fact. Even extreme outlets like Sputnik and Breitbart might publish a lot of highly opinionated crap, and have a less rigorous approach to fact checking, but when it comes down to it they're not fake news, they just report in a particularly biased and lazy manner - they're about as reliable as random people, which isn't great but is better than an informed liar.
The real "fake news" are the websites which spoof reliable ones (abc.com.co), or those with no concern for accuracy whatsoever (Denver Guardian). These are the ones reporting that Pope Francis endorsed Trump, that Hillary Clinton ran a paedophile ring from a pizza restaurant, or that a woman was arrested for using her boss's desk as a toilet after winning the lottery. It does not include some guy Tweeting about MLK's bust being removed and then correcting himself, or people reporting Trump's unpopularity, or the BBC running fewer stories on an issue than you want them to.
You're always going to have a range of opinions in the news media (although Trump seems to be testing that; even most conservative outlets seem to be criticising him right now), that's not a problem, it's one of the benefits of the free press. As I see it, the biggest issue is confirmation bias (people only seeking out news from outlets who they agree with politically). Genuine fake news, and people's inability to distinguish lies from facts, is a real issue, but usually a lesser one.
There's the ridiculous Trump definition, which is "anything which criticises me". There's the similarly ridiculous but less common definition, which is "news from outlets I don't like or presented in a way I don't like". And then there's the sensible original definition which has been overshadowed, publishers spreading hoaxes and disinformation with a deliberate attempt to mislead.
Reputable moderate outlets like CNN and the NYT might occasionally make mistakes, but they are reputable and achieve a level of accuracy which their loudest critics struggle with. Similarly, conservative outlets like the Daily Telegraph and the Chicago Tribune might not agree with you, but they're reputable, reliable, and broadly accurate - not "fake news". Then you have outlets like Fox and MSNBC, which lean a little towards being propaganda outlets but are still nearly always reporting on genuine events. Keep your brain attached and don't depend on them, but you can also be assured that what they say has some basis in fact. Even extreme outlets like Sputnik and Breitbart might publish a lot of highly opinionated crap, and have a less rigorous approach to fact checking, but when it comes down to it they're not fake news, they just report in a particularly biased and lazy manner - they're about as reliable as random people, which isn't great but is better than an informed liar.
The real "fake news" are the websites which spoof reliable ones (abc.com.co), or those with no concern for accuracy whatsoever (Denver Guardian). These are the ones reporting that Pope Francis endorsed Trump, that Hillary Clinton ran a paedophile ring from a pizza restaurant, or that a woman was arrested for using her boss's desk as a toilet after winning the lottery. It does not include some guy Tweeting about MLK's bust being removed and then correcting himself, or people reporting Trump's unpopularity, or the BBC running fewer stories on an issue than you want them to.
You're always going to have a range of opinions in the news media (although Trump seems to be testing that; even most conservative outlets seem to be criticising him right now), that's not a problem, it's one of the benefits of the free press. As I see it, the biggest issue is confirmation bias (people only seeking out news from outlets who they agree with politically). Genuine fake news, and people's inability to distinguish lies from facts, is a real issue, but usually a lesser one.
This isn't why the media made the term up for, they made it up to tar & feather sites like Breitbart and Drudge while insinuating some malicious Russian influence behind them before it backfired in their face. The media in it's stupidity really doesn't comprehend the bubble they live in, their hubris about 'fake news' showed their total lack of self-awareness and how distorted the perception of themselves is as it obviously was immediately seized upon & applied against them. Now they're scrambling pretending they only innocently meant spoof websites as if they had a serious effect on the election and warranted full scale media narrative push across platforms(this is how you know their is coordination in the media). They are not making mistakes, they are not journalists nor do they deserve the respect of one. It's ridiculous that the propagandists on CNN(reputable and moderate to who, you and no one else?
) try to say that calling them 'fake news' is like calling a black person the 'n-word'. 'Fake news' was never meant in the most literal sense and it's fun to make these people live by their own rules & squirm, Saul Alinsky can teach us all so much.
19 Feb 2017, 10:55 am
Jacoby wrote:
The_Walrus wrote:
I think there's quite a bit of confusion as to what constitutes "fake news", particularly among Trump supporters but also generally.
There's the ridiculous Trump definition, which is "anything which criticises me". There's the similarly ridiculous but less common definition, which is "news from outlets I don't like or presented in a way I don't like". And then there's the sensible original definition which has been overshadowed, publishers spreading hoaxes and disinformation with a deliberate attempt to mislead.
Reputable moderate outlets like CNN and the NYT might occasionally make mistakes, but they are reputable and achieve a level of accuracy which their loudest critics struggle with. Similarly, conservative outlets like the Daily Telegraph and the Chicago Tribune might not agree with you, but they're reputable, reliable, and broadly accurate - not "fake news". Then you have outlets like Fox and MSNBC, which lean a little towards being propaganda outlets but are still nearly always reporting on genuine events. Keep your brain attached and don't depend on them, but you can also be assured that what they say has some basis in fact. Even extreme outlets like Sputnik and Breitbart might publish a lot of highly opinionated crap, and have a less rigorous approach to fact checking, but when it comes down to it they're not fake news, they just report in a particularly biased and lazy manner - they're about as reliable as random people, which isn't great but is better than an informed liar.
The real "fake news" are the websites which spoof reliable ones (abc.com.co), or those with no concern for accuracy whatsoever (Denver Guardian). These are the ones reporting that Pope Francis endorsed Trump, that Hillary Clinton ran a paedophile ring from a pizza restaurant, or that a woman was arrested for using her boss's desk as a toilet after winning the lottery. It does not include some guy Tweeting about MLK's bust being removed and then correcting himself, or people reporting Trump's unpopularity, or the BBC running fewer stories on an issue than you want them to.
You're always going to have a range of opinions in the news media (although Trump seems to be testing that; even most conservative outlets seem to be criticising him right now), that's not a problem, it's one of the benefits of the free press. As I see it, the biggest issue is confirmation bias (people only seeking out news from outlets who they agree with politically). Genuine fake news, and people's inability to distinguish lies from facts, is a real issue, but usually a lesser one.
There's the ridiculous Trump definition, which is "anything which criticises me". There's the similarly ridiculous but less common definition, which is "news from outlets I don't like or presented in a way I don't like". And then there's the sensible original definition which has been overshadowed, publishers spreading hoaxes and disinformation with a deliberate attempt to mislead.
Reputable moderate outlets like CNN and the NYT might occasionally make mistakes, but they are reputable and achieve a level of accuracy which their loudest critics struggle with. Similarly, conservative outlets like the Daily Telegraph and the Chicago Tribune might not agree with you, but they're reputable, reliable, and broadly accurate - not "fake news". Then you have outlets like Fox and MSNBC, which lean a little towards being propaganda outlets but are still nearly always reporting on genuine events. Keep your brain attached and don't depend on them, but you can also be assured that what they say has some basis in fact. Even extreme outlets like Sputnik and Breitbart might publish a lot of highly opinionated crap, and have a less rigorous approach to fact checking, but when it comes down to it they're not fake news, they just report in a particularly biased and lazy manner - they're about as reliable as random people, which isn't great but is better than an informed liar.
The real "fake news" are the websites which spoof reliable ones (abc.com.co), or those with no concern for accuracy whatsoever (Denver Guardian). These are the ones reporting that Pope Francis endorsed Trump, that Hillary Clinton ran a paedophile ring from a pizza restaurant, or that a woman was arrested for using her boss's desk as a toilet after winning the lottery. It does not include some guy Tweeting about MLK's bust being removed and then correcting himself, or people reporting Trump's unpopularity, or the BBC running fewer stories on an issue than you want them to.
You're always going to have a range of opinions in the news media (although Trump seems to be testing that; even most conservative outlets seem to be criticising him right now), that's not a problem, it's one of the benefits of the free press. As I see it, the biggest issue is confirmation bias (people only seeking out news from outlets who they agree with politically). Genuine fake news, and people's inability to distinguish lies from facts, is a real issue, but usually a lesser one.
This isn't why the media made the term up for, they made it up to tar & feather sites like Breitbart and Drudge while insinuating some malicious Russian influence behind them before it backfired in their face. The media in it's stupidity really doesn't comprehend the bubble they live in, their hubris about 'fake news' showed their total lack of self-awareness and how distorted the perception of themselves is as it obviously was immediately seized upon & applied against them. Now they're scrambling pretending they only innocently meant spoof websites as if they had a serious effect on the election and warranted full scale media narrative push across platforms(this is how you know their is coordination in the media). They are not making mistakes, they are not journalists nor do they deserve the respect of one. It's ridiculous that the propagandists on CNN(reputable and moderate to who, you and no one else?
) try to say that calling them 'fake news' is like calling a black person the 'n-word'. 'Fake news' was never meant in the most literal sense and it's fun to make these people live by their own rules & squirm, Saul Alinsky can teach us all so much.It seemed directly after the election, every week there was a different reason for Trump winning.
19 Feb 2017, 11:05 am
androbot01
Veteran
Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
19 Feb 2017, 11:15 am
