The issue of the suspicion of "fake news".

**G-DDT** · February-28-17, 05:18 AM

Who would ever think years ago that we'd be debating this with any given bombast who has no clear sense of critical comparative thinking going on under their red cap. Now, I'm sitting here in the wee hours of the morning calling off work for the second day in a row [[due to an ear infection) pondering the matter as it applies to comparing things in their full scope.

Yet, for what I once thought was "fake news" as it applies to anything like "Pizzagate" [[and I want to commend everyone on DY for not passing along that certain topical flatulence, so pardon me for even being the one who "dealt it" with "passing" reference.) or insane theories about Sandy Hook being a "false flag", I've seen radical conservatives spin and use that label on anything that not only criticizes or fact checks Trump's more spurious statements and ideologies but also the media that just depicts him in his raw moments of contradicting errancy-by his own words.

While some may want to criticize the New York Times or Washington Post as being "fake", there is another source being targeted [[yes, an article by the Post). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.554733d53849

One doesn't have to be a great media analyst to see that the news one would get from PBS, Democracy Now, or many foreign outlets is far more detailed, incisive, and superior than the selective, edited pablum we get from mainstream outlets in the US.

Going by that---If we were to give credence to the argument that mainstream, corporate media is "corrupt" [[something both sides have been known to state-and only most recently with the right, which normally supported large, corporate media in the past. Also, I've always gotten the impression that most folks on DY mistrust even their local news outlets seeing the complete lack of reference to them as sources as compared to other forums I've read. Seems to me folks on DY at one point were more keen to cite and discuss local current events not pertaining to things like buildings and development.), then why would a political figurehead reach beyond that and target news outlets like PBS [[and the others I mentioned above) that have better integrity going for him?

Sounds like clear suppression to me.

What is "fake" to him?-clip after clip showing the world how he conducts himself? Nothing is more damning than his own behavior.

Besides what is "not fake" to him? Bellicose blogger news coming from guys just as flippant in their reactions to a whisper of a rumor as he is with his late night tweet sprees?

Speaking of PBS, there is a long article where librarians and history-minded scholars feel they must make a stand regarding Trump's recent executive orders and the cloud of disinformation that tends to gather around justifying Trump's actions. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/...-news-problem/and http://www.pbs.org/newshour/art/libr...cutive-orders/.

Keep in mind that whatever shreds of integrity and importance that remains still invested in media is quickly becoming an endangered thing, as this John Oliver clip I often cite will outline-
and folks who study history as it applied to places like Communist Russia, North Korea, or Nazi Germany would tell you that any restriction to access of quality information is not a good thing.

**Meddle** · February-28-17, 06:27 AM

They don't call it FAUX News for nuthin'.

**Jimaz** · February-28-17, 09:25 AM

I've always had this creepy suspicion that most people subconsciously underestimate how much the power of depiction influences public opinion.

It's often revealing to watch how the media depicts itself.

**Ray1936** · February-28-17, 02:20 PM

News agencies can be very biased without reporting fake news. Example:

Story 1: "Woman brutalized by local police".
Story 2: "Two police officers shot responding to alarm".

CNBC would report story 1 and ignore story 2.
Fox would report story 2 and ignore story 1.

A true news reporting agency would report both stories. Alas, it doesn't happen.

**Richard** · February-28-17, 04:42 PM

They did protray a guy that had several fake news sites on social media,he made lots of bank on the clicks and adds so it is profitable to be a purveyor of fake news.

It seems as though a fair and balanced news site is pretty rare these days,CNN spent 6 hours covering one thing that President Trump did that they did not agree with.

It becomes a form of intertainment when one is really bored on social Media and somebody posts a article about somebody said something that you know there was no way anybody could have even known what was said even if it was said to begin with.

But read the thousands of comments with people freaking out and you really see why this country is so screwed up and how easy it is to lead the blind.

**Honky Tonk** · March-01-17, 11:22 AM

I'm more wary of fake posts.

**JBMcB** · March-01-17, 08:06 PM

A few tips for parsing news, even from "reputable" sources:

If a story references "A source," or an "Anonymous source," take it with a huge grain of salt. Odds are more than not, it's a controlled leak by an organization, or a leak by someone trying to influence, or sandbag someone else in the organization.

"Linked to" or "Associated with" can mean, literally, anything. It could mean two people play poker every Friday night, or are best friends, or one gave the other huge amounts of money, or they once met at a party 20 years ago. Unless the connection is explained, take it with a grain of salt.

"So and so did not respond to repeated attempts for a comment..." I know a few people who were "attempted to contact for comment" and they absolutely were never contacted for a comment. If an author fails to get a counterpoint from a subject of an article, I tend to ignore it.

**Pam** · March-02-17, 09:30 AM

Some of the people calling others fake are themselves fake. The Bernie Sanders campaign was a big eye opener. The amount of spin and lies by the mainstream media to prop up Hillary and smear Bernie was incredible. An example was the Nevada State Dem. convention. Someone reported a lie that chairs had been thrown by Sanders supporters. The lie was repeated by all the major news outlets including NPR and the New York Times without even attempting to contact anyone who had been there.

Also all the suspicions of election fraud by the Democrats in the primary hasn't been covered by the mainstream media at all. Instead they want to run with the bogus "Russian hacking" story without any proof of that. Coverage of Hillary's assorted scandals was also scant. The only info. on TV I pay attention to is the weatherman. All my other news sources are from the internet.

**Honky Tonk** · March-02-17, 09:41 AM

Well, you can cool it,
You can heat it . . .
'Cause, baby, I don't need it . . .
Take your TV tube and eat it
'N all that phony stuff on sports
'N all the unconfirmed reports
You know I watched that rotten box
Until my head begin to hurt
From checkin' out the way
The newsman say they get the dirt
Before the guys on channel so-and-so

And further they assert
That any show they'll interrupt
To bring you news if it comes up
They say that if the place blows up
They will be the first to tell,
Because the boys they got downtown
Are workin' hard and doin' swell,
And if anybody gets the news
Before it hits the street,
They say that no one blabs it faster
Their coverage can't be beat

Frank Zappa

**coracle** · March-02-17, 11:48 AM

The most trustworthy and accurate TV News Channel is OANN but it's not widely distributed [[it's on AT&T-TV) perhaps for those reasons. Their News is not "doctored" to make it controversial to attract political ghouls, and it doesn't project a left wing fixation; it reports the News without loading it with their own or paid political operative's opinions.

One very pleasing aspect of OANN is it doesn't have a lot of career scumbags talking down to you a la CNN et al. As it's name implies it's "American" and not "democrat" slanted; so it's for everybody [[not just the people that didn't make America great)

**Bigb23** · March-02-17, 12:24 PM

For impartiality on major news events, I go to the Canadian national news channels.
CTV, CBC, and Global news don't have a dog in the fight when it comes to American politics.
Throw in BBC, and you get real "Fair and Balanced" reporting.

Mostly, I have far more trust in the Major Media than anything and anyone in this new administration.

**Pam** · March-02-17, 07:19 PM

Jimmy Dore looks at fake news from CNN:

https://youtu.be/DSuMBwZVPt8

**oladub** · March-02-17, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by Pam

Jimmy Dore looks at fake news from CNN:
https://youtu.be/DSuMBwZVPt8

Pam, Good article. My approach to news is having multiple sources. I start my news day with BBC World News which has its own anti-Brexit and anti-Trump agenda. I'm ok with that because BBC is generally a good source of world news and there are other news venues that provide other or opposite opinions. I'm skeptical of extreme partisan outliers like Rachel Maddow and Alex Jones but the more ways something is looked at the better. I agree that the corporate news had a pro-Hillary anti-Sanders bias. I went through all this supporting Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012. Nevada Republican conventions were just as crazy 3:40; must be something in the water.

**canuck** · March-02-17, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by coracle

The most trustworthy and accurate TV News Channel is OANN but it's not widely distributed [[it's on AT&T-TV) perhaps for those reasons. Their News is not "doctored" to make it controversial to attract political ghouls, and it doesn't project a left wing fixation; it reports the News without loading it with their own or paid political operative's opinions.

One very pleasing aspect of OANN is it doesn't have a lot of career scumbags talking down to you a la CNN et al. As it's name implies it's "American" and not "democrat" slanted; so it's for everybody [[not just the people that didn't make America great)

News is news. Who cares if it's fake.

**coracle** · March-03-17, 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by canuck

News is news. Who cares if it's fake.

That is certainly a VERY odd question Canuck. What is the point of listening to lies?

**Honky Tonk** · March-03-17, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by coracle

What is the point of listening to lies?

Depends what she looks like?

**GMan** · March-03-17, 01:35 PM

How bout putting the photo of Chuck Schumer with Vladi Putin eating a donut in the news.
After all Chuckie is making a stink about Session's and Trump's ties to Russia.
Come on news agencies. Show us how the hypocrites play.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...utin-hypocrite

**Bigb23** · March-03-17, 02:04 PM

The issue of the suspicion of "fake news".

WAIT - WAIT, the Weekly World News was lying to me all of those years ???

Oh the humanity !!

Attachment 32859

Attachment 32860

Damn just missed !

Attachment 32861

At least I saved Donald Trump the embarrassment of re-tweeting from this trusted news source.

**Pam** · March-03-17, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by Bigb23

WAIT - WAIT, the Weekly World News was lying to me all of those years ???

Oh the humanity !!

Attachment 32859

Attachment 32860
Damn just missed !

Attachment 32861

Ha. At least they made fake news fun.

**Pam** · March-03-17, 07:43 PM

How about a whole fake organization? The White Helmets in Syria:

https://youtu.be/jpJNiWcKDMU

**GMan** · March-04-17, 07:54 AM

Originally Posted by Bigb23

WAIT - WAIT, the Weekly World News was lying to me all of those years ???

Oh the humanity !!

Attachment 32859

Attachment 32860
Damn just missed !

Attachment 32861

So Big Foot isn't a Democrat???

**canuck** · March-04-17, 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by coracle

That is certainly a VERY odd question Canuck. What is the point of listening to lies?

I listen to lies and find charm in them over truth if you care to know. I know Trump is all about truth and greatness and fighting the evil press corps but I can't help myself. Schwarzenegger just abdicated his post on Celebrity Apprentice. Nobody can rise to the level of Donald, and so Donald tells us. I am beginning to see the light. I also am more enthused about your new President. Everybody who disagrees with him I now dismiss as fakemonger, or loser or just plain bad.

**noise** · March-06-17, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by coracle

The most trustworthy and accurate TV News Channel is OANN but it's not widely distributed [[it's on AT&T-TV) perhaps for those reasons. Their News is not "doctored" to make it controversial to attract political ghouls, and it doesn't project a left wing fixation; it reports the News without loading it with their own or paid political operative's opinions.

One very pleasing aspect of OANN is it doesn't have a lot of career scumbags talking down to you a la CNN et al. As it's name implies it's "American" and not "democrat" slanted; so it's for everybody [[not just the people that didn't make America great)

What a surprise. Coracle suggests a self-identified conservative network is the most trustworthy and accurate.

**noise** · March-06-17, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by GMan

How bout putting the photo of Chuck Schumer with Vladi Putin eating a donut in the news.
After all Chuckie is making a stink about Session's and Trump's ties to Russia.
Come on news agencies. Show us how the hypocrites play.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...utin-hypocrite

The "stink" isn't about Sessions or Trump eating a donut with Putin.