What do you think of 'fake news'?
It seems to have been a big thing of late, this idea of 'fake news' that's just rampant, which also played a part in this year's election.
Facebook's already made steps towards solving the so called problem.
Hillary Clinton has spoke out about it, also.
So, what do you make of it?
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
Well I don't know if the problem is really "fake news" but rather the way it's presented and the bias behind the presentation. Infowars and Breitbart have been declared as
"Fake News" but I doubt they make up their own stories, for what would even be the point of that? They'd only be shooting themselves in the foot if that were the case. I think "Fake News" translates to "News that is presented and displayed in a manner that fits the narrative of the ones publishing the news."
The credibility of major news networks haven taken a hit this year and although I believe fake news is out there, it's my opinion that it's being used as a scapegoat over the election results. Fake news has always been around, but the timing of these news networks suddenly caring more about it strikes me as being convenient.
Fake News isn't New News. You'd be surprised how long this has been going on. Canada for example has a law against False News Reporting, and if I recall it's hundreds of years old. You can actually be put on trial for making false claims in public, or in a news paper. If, someone decides to prosecute of course. It isn't a bad idea as long as the practice of "double speak" isn't abused when in reference to such a law.
To be honest, if it sounds too damning to be true, it's likely not true. Clinton running a pedophilia ring, anyone who believed that is an absolute idiot. Clinton launched a secret coup to take over the US Government, and CIA/FBI agents are running a counter coup to stop her secretly behind the scenes. Again, only an absolute idiot would of believed that. I remember a few people posting stuff like that on the forums. It was utter lunacy. I was not sure if they were trolling, or whether they actually believed it.
That being said. Fake News is easily defeated by logic and common sense. For example. If someone claimed Trump was secretly a Neo Nazi planning on Taking over the US Government and handing it over to Fascist. (Points to the two Clinton claims above, which spread like wild fire across the internet). Well it's quite obvious it isn't true. If someone claimed Trump had taken favors to help one of his business prospects. Well now that is actually believable, even if it isn't true, it fits his character, and his history.
Did you know Obama and Osama are only 1 letter apart?
This looks like a job for...
Wait till the very end.
There's been fake news online for well over a decade. Why do they suddenly care about it now, I do have to wonder?
Granted, conspiracy theories have really proliferated through the internet, but that's been going on so long it just doesn't make sense to suddenly care. Just 'cause it aided in a a corrupt moron winning an election? I'm skeptical, since this isn't the first time that's happened.
There's fake news everywhere and also supposedly true news that is proven false several years later, it's difficult to believe anything without direct sources to prove it sometimes.
Fake news is good if done in the name of satire or parody.
Yeah, Canada has laws, but as anyone whom lives in a city which produces The Sun can tell you, it's not overly enforced. They tend to exaggerate the news a bit. Plus we still sell the same tabloids which are in the USA(unsure if they have a disclaimer somewhere on them or not).
Excuse for future censorship and manipulation of the news we see, the election proved the people are not sheep so they must find further ways to control public opinion
Like NSA was created to steal private information from everyone the excuse then terrorists
Member the leaks revealed the corruption and lies within goverment the excuse now HURDUR russia evil.
Their lies revealed, they hack everyone that's fair, yet hack them they want a war ironic and hypocrital.
Only thing hack did was reveal what they wrote/did only themselves to Blame
Rant over
Absolutely hate fake news but it can be easy to avoid for me by only sticking to original sources and just not believe anything else unless it's a trusted source.
I'm under the assumption it's a left over from the Colonial Days. A law in place so the Colonial Government had the power to go after Press who said things not in line with the Government, or Empire. If, and only if it became dangerous, and actually caused problems of course. Satire is fine, in the eyes of most governments, unless it starts to cause problems. USA right now, Fake News is becoming a problem, only because people are stupid enough to believe even the most insane false claims. Satire isn't meant to be believed, unless you're that naive. lol
It did quite the opposite.
Fake new isn't good. At all. To be honest, we really don't know who is telling the truth or not. Here are some examples:
Rachel Maddow falsely claims NAFTA was signed by George H.W. Bush when Bill Clinton was the one who really signed it. The ironic thing? MSNBC is supposed to be "real news."
Another ironic story on MSNBC was when Brian Williams claimed he was shot down in Iraq, which he lied about
He then has the audacity to call sources like Breitbart "fake news." Why is Breitbart apparently fake news and MSNBC is real news? Hypocrites.
How so?
Exactly. Even if Russia did hack the DNC that isn't what people should really be complaining about; people (well, the media and establishment) should be complaining about the corruption in our government. If Russia hacked the DNC, we should be thanking them for exposing the truth.
Because it shows that people only get their "news" from heavily opinionated news sources. Before it was only stuff like FOX and CNN, now it's extremely biased blog-level BS like Breitbart and the Young Turks. Hillary Clinton probably wouldn't have been the nominee, nor would Trump have won in the general election were people watching/reading unbiased sources. Somehow there are actually people out there who believe Hillary Clinton isn't corrupt and others that don't believe that Donald Trump is a sociopath.
This election showed the American people have been thoroughly lobotomized by their ideologies.
It seems to be a label used by each side to attack the other, particularly by those who think that the only 'true' media is the far-right media like breitbart.
It's a nonsense narrative created by and for the left as yet another way to deflect blame from the fact they lost. The right has since hijacked it for purposes of irony and satire - so now both sides just say everything the other says, is fake, so that's helpful.
Breitbart seems to be public enemy #1 throughout all of this - which is absurd, because all these people critiquing the site for its various faults, are oblivious to the fact Buzzfeed, Huffington Post, Jezebel, Salon, Vox, Guardian, formerly Gawker, I could go on and on, do exactly the same thing, from their side, which of course they're all fine with.
So really, this has nothing to do with whether the news is true or false, and everything to do with its angle.
This sort of thing was inevitable though - the mainstream media has failed, and now everyone is seeking alternative media, and what do they go for? One's that exclusively cater to their biases, of course.
And if it happens to be the wrong bias, well, we'll create a scandal like this and use totally impartial middlemen like Twitter, Facebook, Google, and YouTube to clamp down.