View Full Version : Is General Discussion a "Fake News" site?
Business_Casual
11-22-16, 06:27
For discussion:
Under the Google and Facebook approach, what will be "fake news" and how is it different from other news?
If a reporter asks Nancy Pelosi will Obama pardon Clinton and she says "For what?" Is that fake news?
If Alex Jones reports actual vote fraud on Infowars, is that fake news?
Under the definitions floating around, is M4Carbine General Discussion a "Fake News" site?
For discussion:
Under the Google and Facebook approach, what will be "fake news" and how is it different from other news?
If a reporter asks Nancy Pelosi will Obama pardon Clinton and she says "For what?" Is that fake news?
If Alex Jones reports actual vote fraud on Infowars, is that fake news?
Under the definitions floating around, is M4Carbine General Discussion a "Fake News" site?
No. It does not purport to be a news site. It does not have journalists looking for and reporting "news". (Theoretically objectively)
A forum by definition would not be a news site, though we for sure discuss the news.
And given how non-objective the press/news was lately I have seen posts here which highlighted a development or article I would not have seen otherwise.
We can certainly learn of current events in a forum even if the forum itself is not a news org.
Averageman
11-22-16, 08:39
No, but if Breitbart does a News Channel I will be looking forward to seeing a few of you deliver the "Editorial".
Doc Safari
11-22-16, 09:25
No, but if Breitbart does a News Channel I will be looking forward to seeing a few of you deliver the "Editorial".
Anxiously awaiting "Trump TV", thanks.
SomeOtherGuy
11-22-16, 09:47
The "fake news" label is even more misleading than "assault weapons."
All appearances are that "fake news" is any combination of (a) genuine, factual information, (b) inferences and assumptions stated as such, and (c) logical analyses and conclusions from those, which the handlers of the corporate propaganda machine (so-called "mainstream media" - but it is no longer either of those) do not want to be heard widely, generally because it threatens currently vested power interests or commercial interests.
Any purported "news" that is actually fake is generally easy to identify as such and doesn't require a propaganda machine pushback.
Basically, the corporate propaganda machine isn't working like it used to, and both the machine and its customers are @_#$ terrified of where that could lead.
Averageman
11-22-16, 10:14
Anxiously awaiting "Trump TV", thanks.
I'm waiting for Firefly to give his opinion piece on why he can't buy good running shoes in 'Merica, and then lean back and throw two giant "Sideshow Bob" sized feet up on the desk and yell "All I wanna do is Run again!"
Averageman
11-22-16, 10:15
The "fake news" label is even more misleading than "assault weapons."
All appearances are that "fake news" is any combination of (a) genuine, factual information, (b) inferences and assumptions stated as such, and (c) logical analyses and conclusions from those, which the handlers of the corporate propaganda machine (so-called "mainstream media" - but it is no longer either of those) do not want to be heard widely, generally because it threatens currently vested power interests or commercial interests.
Any purported "news" that is actually fake is generally easy to identify as such and doesn't require a propaganda machine pushback.
Basically, the corporate propaganda machine isn't working like it used to, and both the machine and its customers are @_#$ terrified of where that could lead.
I have a feeling the truth is really beginning to cause the agenda some pain.
"Fake News" is some shit I'd expect to hear from the ChiComs or the Norks.
jerrysimons
11-22-16, 12:15
While the left is going to attempt to get mileage out of the expression, there are literally fake news outlets thriving off ignorance and clique bait mentality of social media. They will say it is satire and generally they lean left, but it is a phenomena of punking and embarrassing people by believing it and posting it.
There is plenty of fake click bait crap on FB. It can look legit but the more I see it the easier it is to pick it out.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-22-16, 13:05
Fake news like "Hands Up, Don't Shoot"?
There is an issue here, but like everything else, they won't let a 'crisis' of any potential to go to waste.
Averageman
11-22-16, 13:52
Fake news like "Hands Up, Don't Shoot"?
There is an issue here, but like everything else, they won't let a 'crisis' of any potential to go to waste.
There in lies the rub.
Is it they don't like the "News" or do they feel like they've lost control of the narrative?
Everyone remembers the name of Michael Brown, but how many can name two of the four Cops shot in the last 3 days?
ColtSeavers
11-22-16, 13:55
There in lies the rub.
Is it they don't like the "News" or do they feel like they've lost control of the narrative?
http://www.madaboutmemes.com/uploads/memes/219.png
"fake news" may be misleading by definition. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, MSNBC, CNN, BBC, CSNBC and get a lot of there information from Reuters and Associated Press on global issues like GWOT, global economy, world leaders, etc. Most US news outlets are not original news outlets except for local news.
News sites like Huffington, Slate, Vox, Infowars, Daily Show , Buzzfeed, New Yorker, Politico, The Economist, Colbert Report, Yahoo, Google, Blaze, Sean Hannity, Bloomberg, PBS and others are not the original source for news. In fact, there is not much news at all, mostly opinionated commentary on a developing story or major topic.
"Fake News" is already morphing into anything the leftist media doesn't like. It is partly an attack on non-legacy news sources, and partly a deflection on the legacy news collusion with the Dems.
Doc Safari
11-22-16, 15:32
"Fake News" is already morphing into anything the leftist media doesn't like. It is partly an attack on non-legacy news sources, and partly a deflection on the legacy news collusion with the Dems.
DING DING DING. THAT IS THE CORRECT ANSWER.
I'LL TAKE "FAKE NEWS IS WHAT WE SAY IT IS" FOR $500, ALEX.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fake
fake
verb
transitive verb
1
: to alter, manipulate, or treat so as to give a spuriously genuine appearance to : doctor <faked the lab results>
2
: counterfeit, simulate, concoct <faked a heart attack>
3
: to deceive (an opponent) in a sports contest by means of a fake
4
: improvise, ad-lib <whistle a few bars
and I'll fake the rest Robert Sylvester>
intransitive verb
1
: to engage in faking something : pretend sometimes used with it <if you don't have the answers, fake it>
2
: to give a fake to an opponent
faker
noun
fakery
play \ˈfā-k(ə-)rē\ noun
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/news
news
noun |\ˈnüz, ˈnyüz\
1
: a report of recent events or unknown information <I have good news! We won!>
2
: information or recent events reported in a newspaper or magazine or on a broadcast
3
: a broadcast of information on recent events <We saw pictures of a flood on the evening news.>
4
: an event that is interesting enough to be reported
Now that we've actually defined the words by the rules, they apply to EVERY media source currently in existence. The so-called term "fake news" is merely a clever application of the words by sources that oppose the use of media in any matter in opposition to said source's use of media. It is a propaganda term.
The real question is "Why does it work?" The answer is brutally simple. Our world has lost the ability to DISCERN the meaning of things. "News" is merely information that is emerging or just being communicated to us. The quality of any news SHOULD be evaluated for source, accuracy, verifiability, timeliness, relevance, importance, etc.. That's where almost all media outlets fail us, because these aren't defining qualities for them. Defining qualities for media outlets are things like monetary value, speed, confirmation bias, preferred outcomes, etc.. Sure, they like to pretend they're giving you the most accurate, up to date and important information, but they really aren't. That's why media outlets are in so much trouble these days. They've traded their credibility for a few shekels and preferred outcomes.
So when insert preferred media source here reports something flashy that really doesn't have any practical usefulness to the recipient, that's the hook. All the hook is there for is to suck you in, so they can reap advertising dollars and push their agenda out to the masses. The source is utterly irrelevant. It can range from the major networks to some crackpot's blog site. It can be NRA.com or Salon.com, doesn't matter. They all have a point to make and money to earn, so anything else is of secondary concern.
That's my jaded but imminently practical view of things anyway.
DING DING DING. THAT IS THE CORRECT ANSWER.
I'LL TAKE "FAKE NEWS IS WHAT WE SAY IT IS" FOR $500, ALEX.
I can't believe it took until page 2 for the correct answer.
"fake news" may be misleading by definition. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, MSNBC, CNN, BBC, CSNBC and get a lot of there information from Reuters and Associated Press on global issues like GWOT, global economy, world leaders, etc. Most US news outlets are not original news outlets except for local news.
News sites like Huffington, Slate, Vox, Infowars, Daily Show , Buzzfeed, New Yorker, Politico, The Economist, Colbert Report, Yahoo, Google, Blaze, Sean Hannity, Bloomberg, PBS and others are not the original source for news. In fact, there is not much news at all, mostly opinionated commentary on a developing story or major topic.
That is the key issue. Editorial opinion presented as news. It used to be editorial bias selectively reporting the news, but now that bias is being presented as news itself.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-22-16, 17:49
I can't believe it took until page 2 for the correct answer.
20 posts per page, rookie.
Isn't the real genesis of fake news SNLs 'Weekend Report' followed by 'The Dailey Show'? They get to play progressively faster and looser with the facts because they deem it entertainment, but how many millennials had TDS as their primary news source. Tack on Hiffy post as a third point and you have it and MSNBC along with the blurring of editorial and news reporting because of the need to fill time and push content out.
Obviously, there are truly things out there meant to deceive people, but to say they are some alt-right creation that popped out of the media quantum foam is BS.
Business_Casual
11-22-16, 18:02
Free speech, anyone?
Isn't the real genesis of fake news SNLs 'Weekend Report' followed by 'The Dailey Show'? They get to play progressively faster and looser with the facts because they deem it entertainment, but how many millennials had TDS as their primary news source.
Your not far off. In fact, the national political correspondent for The Huffington Post was a writer for The Daily Show with John Stewart. The senior editor in chief came from Buzz Feed. I'm not making this up either. In fact, Huffington Post has hired quite a few people from Comedy Central to be a part of there company. If your target audience is millennials, then you will need to have a team made up from people from Buzz Feed, Comedy Central, and writers from various magazines/blogs that are in touch with millennials such as US Weekly, People, Slate, Cosmopolitan, Stuff, Maxim and GQ. Vox is another good example: the writers are made up of young men and women who focus on liberal topics such as LGBT, gun control, drug deregulation, free education and other socialistic views. Most of there writers are more "twitter warriors" than actual journalist. Good example would be German Lopez from Vox- look him up- he is 23 and has a associates degree from University of Phoenix in fashion merchandizing and is writing about things way beyond his experience. But this has been going on a lot since 2008. Several so called news outlets that focus on liberal ideology do hire people from Tumblr, YouTube, Instagram because they can identify with the target audience. For instance, same could be said about Tomi Lahren at One America-The Blaze. In no way is the Blaze a news outlet. Same goes for Info Wars, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck etc. Those are basically opinionated talk shows discussing topics that are either developing or nationally recognized topics. Nothing against Tomi, I know here personally. If you want actual world news before it reaches MSNBC, CNBC, Fox, CBS, ABC, CNN and all the others, read AFP, Associated Press or Reuters because that's is where 99% of the world gets there major news stories.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
11-22-16, 19:02
The Daily Show and The Young Turks are the liberal news source for MANY. Fake?
Business_Casual
11-22-16, 20:49
The Daily Show and The Young Turks are the liberal news source for MANY. Fake?
Free expression of ideas - that's all news is. Objective reporting isn't possible, humans have too many built-in biases.
Free expression of ideas - that's all news is. Objective reporting isn't possible, humans have too many built-in biases.
Yet we can try to be as unbiased as possible if we wanted to. People have been manufacturing the news since before Hearst built a newspaper empire. But it wouldn't be that hard to be more facts oriented, eliminate the use of statistics that can produce any outcome you wish and remove any editorial content.
Just the who, what, when and where and maybe less of the why.
Moose-Knuckle
11-23-16, 04:07
The left tries to control the vocabulary.
Fake news . . . lol you mean propaganda?!
Yeah it's nothing new and I consider the mainstream media to be "fake news".
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5828/30661939681_e66c2b7ba1_b.jpg
Business_Casual
11-23-16, 05:46
Just the who, what, when and where and maybe less of the why.
I thought a bunch of the posters here are cops, don't they say if you have 4 witnesses you get 5 versions or something like that?
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-23-16, 07:53
I thought a bunch of the posters here are cops, don't they say if you have 4 witnesses you get 5 versions or something like that?
The press is like blind men trying to describe an elephant, but in reality they are just jerking each other off.
The best was the WH Press secretary complaining that RT is state owned so it really isn't a news organization. Wow, MSNBC much? He even admitted the question (about Aleppo hospital bombings) was a legit question, just he didn't like who it was coming from. Even the US press was balking at that...
For a few years, I thought RT just stood for Reuters- especially when it came to the middle east coverage. Really just saw it flipping through hotel channels.
The real answer is teaching logic and critical thinking in school, but that isn't going to work in the Progressive schooling model; they are going the other way.
Ever watch a national, or even worse local report, on something that you actually know something about or are involved in. Scary to think that the crappy reporting, and I do think that 80% of it is intellectual laziness (driven a lot by preconceived perceptions) and just lack of resources, is going on pretty much for every story- and how wrong it is- or at the very least over simplified or slanted in view.
...(driven a lot by preconceived perceptions)...
Preconceived perceptions planted by a very left leaning national news media and educational system. Deliberate falsehoods meant to make our young people support and vote for leftist ideas, ideals, and morally corrupt, criminal, fraudulent, treasonous political candidates.
Sad thing is, they are succeeding even though it is all right out in the open for anyone to see. I've pointed this out to several people and they don't get it. They say they don't watch the news and they aren't influenced by the progressives. They say they support the 2A. Then they repeat, word for word, the progressive mantras: "Who needs a 30 round magazine clip?" Why does anyone need an 'assault rifle'? You can't hunt with it." "Its too easy to buy a gun in this country." "Gun show loophole…" "No fly list…" When you point this out they either switch their brain off, or get angry and go on the attack. I have to work to keep them on track and continue the conversation.
The Bernie thing is what really threw me. We have fought TWO, count them… TWO WORLD WARS to stop socialism and communism. A large percentage of the world's population died fighting WWII. America was instrumental in the defeat of the socialists in both world wars. Now, just a few decades later, "they" have nearly half the voters in this country intentionally voicing support and voting for self-admitted socialist candidates. This boggles my mind. A friend recently explained that because of what is taught in the schools now that young people just don't understand why socialism and communism is bad. They don't see what Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, etc… has to do with Obama, Hillary and Bernie. Apparently, there is a HUGE mental disconnect there. "Oh, you're comparing Bernie to Hitler…"{roll eyes}… I answer, "No. I'm comparing a socialist to another socialist with the same political ideals from the same source."
For discussion:
Under the Google and Facebook approach, what will be "fake news" and how is it different from other news?
If a reporter asks Nancy Pelosi will Obama pardon Clinton and she says "For what?" Is that fake news?
If Alex Jones reports actual vote fraud on Infowars, is that fake news?
Under the definitions floating around, is M4Carbine General Discussion a "Fake News" site?
Fake news will be what ever news cost HC the WH and future Dems the same. We know Suck-A-turd et al would not be so interested had HC won. Again, the bias and zero objectivity in this area is disgusting. There was no lack of fake news stories about Trump, and end of the day, people and journalists have to get off their fat lazy ass and due some due diligence on what they see on the net, just as they do on TV. The potential impact on free speech here, given human bias regardless of where one stands, means nothing good can come from it. As FB and others are private entities, they have the legal right to do as they see fit of course.
Yes, there's lots of tin foil hat whack jobs on both extremes, and they are added noise to the signal, but it's still on my to take some time to figure out and look for multi source confirmation, etc than believe Dem underground or Jones, etc.
I thought a bunch of the posters here are cops, don't they say if you have 4 witnesses you get 5 versions or something like that?
Yes and you do have to attempt to build a cohesive narrative and all that. Film helps.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-23-16, 13:05
Yes and you do have to attempt to build a cohesive narrative and all that. Film helps.
And it is amazing how body cams are about as definitive as instant-replays sometimes, especially in the most odd cases.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-23-16, 13:07
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5828/30661939681_e66c2b7ba1_b.jpg
Commiekite, Teddy Roosevelt and Colin Powell are three people that I didn't really know much about but started reading about them or books by them (Powell) and I really thought there public perception was far different from their actual personality and positions.
I thought a bunch of the posters here are cops, don't they say if you have 4 witnesses you get 5 versions or something like that?
Going on in my AO right now....
http://www.wral.com/police-neighbors-differ-in-account-of-shooting-in-mcdougald-terrace-/16269430/
Three different witnesses, three different stories....
Business_Casual
11-28-16, 05:57
Is it "fake news" if the campaign manager of a candidate attends Crowley-inspired "art" rituals and sends seemingly coded emails about pizza?
https://aceloewgold.com/2016/11/20/pizzagate-clinton-podesta-what-is-it-and-is-it-credible/
RetroRevolver77
11-28-16, 11:57
Is it "fake news" if the campaign manager of a candidate attends Crowley-inspired "art" rituals and sends seemingly coded emails about pizza?
https://aceloewgold.com/2016/11/20/pizzagate-clinton-podesta-what-is-it-and-is-it-credible/
See this is where you recognize what evil truly is. This whole thing aged me a few years reading over that stuff. It is messed up and thankfully we live at a time when this kind of information can be made public.
That is the key issue. Editorial opinion presented as news. It used to be editorial bias selectively reporting the news, but now that bias is being presented as news itself.
This has been going on for a very long time. Walter Cronkite was a master at it.
Averageman
11-28-16, 12:31
That is damned sickening.
Commiekite, Teddy Roosevelt and Colin Powell are three people that I didn't really know much about but started reading about them or books by them (Powell) and I really thought there public perception was far different from their actual personality and positions.
Much truth here. Folks think of Powell as a Republican. If one reads his book, he is much a center/left Democrat. I think him an honorable person with whom I simply disagree on certain subjects.
Reading Cronkite's book was very illuminating. He admits unshamefully to reporting the news in a manner to manipulate thought and opinion. He had aspirations of running for POTUS (as a liberal Democrat) and this shaped his "reporting". Cue his address to America after the Tet Offensive here...
GD here and on TOS is one hell of an echo chamber though. Dissenting opinions don't have much of a chance.
Mainstream Media is "fake news" if you ask me. It's full of false ideas, fake polls, twisted logic and encouragement to rid the world of any semblance of independence, sovereignty and Liberty - you know, the things that every souled being desires (whether he can articulate same or not).
But those bastions of "media" probably view ME as a source of "false news".
I'd not recommend putting too much thought into this. Simply be.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GD here and on TOS is one hell of an echo chamber though. Dissenting opinions don't have much of a chance.
That has been my opinion as well. People desperately need to step "outside the box" of "generally approved opinion" and really THINK about what's going on.
Most won't. But they need to.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Is it "fake news" if the campaign manager of a candidate attends Crowley-inspired "art" rituals and sends seemingly coded emails about pizza?
https://aceloewgold.com/2016/11/20/pizzagate-clinton-podesta-what-is-it-and-is-it-credible/
And it's nothing new.
If I had suggested something like that taking place at the highest levels of our government ten years ago I would have been banned... And it wasn't new then, either... [emoji102]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
... Yes, there's lots of tin foil hat whack jobs on both extremes, and they are added noise to the signal, but it's still on my to take some time to figure out and look for multi source confirmation, etc than believe Dem underground or Jones, etc.
I would not be so quick to dismiss ALL of what Alex Jones presents - though I don't like the manner in which he reports things: too sensationalistic for me.
Read everything with an open mind. You may find that you have "inadequate background" for some stuff and you will have to go learn something else to comprehend where an author may be coming from.
No one said it would not be obtained without effort.
Sometimes the effort is freaking huge...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Outlander Systems
11-28-16, 19:12
https://i.redd.it/ol970kkt2nyx.jpg
Outlander Systems
11-28-16, 19:24
https://youtu.be/-b0auTDcJHI
Do you even Johnny Gosch, Gannongate, Franklin Scandal, Jimmy Savile, Catholic Priest, Jerry Sandusky, Michael Aquino/Presidio, McMartin Preschool, bro?
And it's nothing new.
RetroRevolver77
12-05-16, 17:20
The world is a sick place, whether you want to believe it or not.
The good guys are few and far between it seems.
7n6
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.