Isn't Trump right about the fake news?

[Xeones]

Trump and trumps lawyer both have said that no subpoena ever happened and the source of that pieve of fake news was "a person briefed on the matter". Ok....anonymous source.

So the anonymous source is, presumably, someone who should know.

Your source, Trump and his lawyer, on the other hand are people who would not know and have exhibited behavior of trying to hush factual information earlier in the year.

Why would I not trust journalists who have been finding valid and factual information all year about him and instead believe the man who has been doing nothing but lying all year about this issue?

[ezgeze]

Oh yes, lets not forget that one of the senior lawyers in the muellers investigation team was demoted last week for lying about his involvement in multiple meetings with the creators of that trump dossier but this guys wife actually works for the creators of fusion gps who actually created the dossier. Yeah

[Slant]

Off the top of my head the Koi fish thing and recently the empty stadium at the Trump speech are two news articles that comes to mind. Then again i'm not about to launch a complete journalistic investigation on your account even if you "dare me". Though i'm pretty sure that if i did you would simply dismiss my findings as you people have repeatedly done when i've proven i've done my due diligence.

You can start by explaining how those two events are not fake news.

You're mixing up yellow press with serious journalism. There are things that are traditionally clickbaity and inaccurate. We call that the yellow press and I think it's safe to say it's assumed that everyone can apply some common sense to see that those are irrelevant news filling a paper so it doesn't look empty. And then there's actual news, like the US being excluded from climate talks in France these days, or Trump actually causing deaths and injuries in a country half the globe away by simply going on a power trip. Those people in Jerusalem and Bethlehem were having a quiet time until last week.

Those are actual news. And then there's libel... if the papers are actually lying about Trump, why's he not taking them to court successfully over these issues? No, he doesn't. He'd rather try to dismantle the little trust people have in newsreporting and thus undermines actual democracy itself (of which the press is actually a part of, believe it or not.)

[ezgeze]

So the anonymous source is, presumably, someone who should know.

Your source, Trump and his lawyer, on the other hand are people who would not know and have exhibited behavior of trying to hush factual information earlier in the year.

Why would I not trust journalists who have been finding valid and factual information all year about him and instead believe the man who has been doing nothing but lying all year about this issue?

Oh, I don't know, how about the fake 3 stories just this past weekend? Journalists today are so adamant on getting trump they are willing to bypass any scrutiny normally given to all reports? The MSM has an agenda and a serious problem with credibility right now.

[LaserSharkDFB]

The media is kind of shooting in its own foot when they fabricate any stories about Trump.

The guy does enough ridiculous stuff, absolutely no need to make anything up.

Yeah, good thing they don't actually, y'know, do that.

It's very rare that one of these stories that end up being wrong are 'fabricated' or 'made up'. What generally happens is someone will get a lead from a trusted source, run with it, and then later we find out the source misstated or the reporter misunderstood something, and corrections have to be made. That's not due to an intent to deceive, that's due to the reporter not following proper procedure and corroborating the facts before going to press. The biggest reason for this is the 24-hour news cycle we have now, which prioritizes getting news out fast.

If you want actual fake news, look to the outlets that don't correct themselves when they're wrong. Like Trump.

[Xeones]

Oh, I don't know, how about the fake 3 stories just this past weekend? Journalists today are so adamant on getting trump they are willing to bypass any scrutiny normally given to all reports? The MSM has an agenda and a serious problem with credibility right now.

And the man who has to hire his press secretary based on their ability to lie and say stupid shit doesn't?

You are trying to ignore the difference between people who should know (the anonymous sources) and people who should not know (the subject of the subpoena)

[ezgeze]

Come on folks lets get real CNN is THE place for hard hitting news with scoops like

Trump eats KFC with a fork and knife? lets ask New York if that's weird


The Donald gets 2 scoops of ice cream while others get one


Is Trump afraid of stairs? Lets discuss


Russian Salad Dressing?


Trump would have killed a gorilla


and likes to kill fish too parently


and place kids in cars without a car seat

Hard hitting and serious news programming here folks

[Machismo]

I don't, at least not on my priority list outside of the more government part.

Which means you also don't give a damn about the "more government" part.

- - - Updated - - -

Come on folks lets get real CNN is THE place for hard hitting news with scoops like

Trump eats KFC with a fork and knife? lets ask New York if that's weird


The Donald gets 2 scoops of ice cream while others get one


Is Trump afraid of stairs? Lets discuss


Russian Salad Dressing?


Hard hitting and serious news programming here folks

And none of that is actually fake news...

[zenkai]

I've looked at numerous cases were Trump has called the media out for delivering fake news and in those instances it did indeed appear that the news articles had been "faked" to make Trump appear to be a buffoon and what not. CNN and WashPo seem to be particularly guilty of this.

I'm not American so i'm not exposed to your media the same as you guys so perhaps i'm missing something.

There is fake news, not every negative Trump calls fake news is fake but at the same time he has pointed some out which gives his supporters reasons not to believe legit criticisms. Majority of "fake news" though is fueled by social media and out of the mouths of "celebrities" and not legit news sources.

[tyrlaan]

There is fake news, not every negative Trump calls fake news is fake but at the same time he has pointed some out which gives his supporters reasons not to believe legit criticisms. Majority of "fake news" though is fueled by social media and out of the mouths of "celebrities" and not legit news sources.

Seems like a beefy claim to place on the shoulders of just celebrities. I agree that social media is a breeding ground for actual fake news, but celebrities are not exactly the source of all the problems, not by a long shot.

[Dezerte]

The Onion might be fake news.

[Grapemask]

I'm still laughing at the assertion that something is fake news because Donald Trump said it is not true (particularly re: bank records). Seriously. You guys saying this, please, tell me you're not being serious. No wait, tell me you are serious. That would be funnier.

[Dontrike]

Come on folks lets get real CNN is THE place for hard hitting news with scoops like

Hard hitting and serious news programming here folks

None of those are fake news, those are just small pieces that every news channel does. Fox did the same thing to Obama for years, but no one was screaming "FAKE NEWS!!!". Instead they went "why was this needed?" because that's all it is just a thing to fill time as 24 hours is incredibly hard to fill.

[Felya]

And none of that is actually fake news...

What he posted is actually called soft news:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_media

Not a single item he posted is actually hard or what I call actual news. The reason fake news is different, it let’s Trump trick people like @ezgeze, by pointing at soft news and redefining it as fake. Because that way, it ignores what soft news is, to make seem hard news is fake. The fact that there is a soft story about ice cream or dressing, does not invalidate hard news, like the investigation into Trump or his staff. He preys on the gullible, in this case @ezgeze not knowing the difference between soft news and hard news.

The fact that your news station runs a story about a surfing dog, doesn’t mean you drowned your dog because of fake news.

[satimy]

People, even intelligent ones tend to believe news that confirms their bias. Big media is owned by the same corporations that are threatened by the wave of populism, and the current structure of click bait and pundit dominated shows is what happens when you don’t enforce antitrust laws in a capitalist society. We have 5 oligarchs that control what 90% of Americans see.

[Felya]

People, even intelligent ones tend to believe news that confirms their bias. Big media is owned by the same corporations that are threatened by the wave of populism, and the current structure of click bait and pundit dominated shows is what happens when you don’t enforce antitrust laws in a capitalist society. We have 5 oligarchs that control what 90% of Americans see.

Is Trump one of those oligarchs? Because he is the one who will sign off on killing net neutrality, which no predecessor did. Literally handing over what you see online, to a handful, locally likely just 1, corporations. If your issue is oligarchs taking over media... electing the active CEO of Trump Organization... might have been a mistake...

[satimy]

Is Trump one of those oligarchs? Because he is the one who will sign off on killing net neutrality, which no predecessor did. Literally handing over what you see online, to a handful, locally likely just 1, corporations. If your issue is oligarchs taking over media... electing the active CEO of Trump Organization... might have been a mistake...

Net neutrality is such a scam argument. It didn’t exist before Obama magically coined the term to fix a problem that never existed. To fix the issues with the internet we need to apply antitrust laws and break the Comcast’s and Verizon’s up. Now are you asking if I think Netflix shouldn’t have to pay more when they consume 70% of the bandwidth in the country? I think they should

[mvaliz]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...umps-lies.html

[[snip]]


Trump is a lying scumball. And you, sir, should go back under your bridge.

Normally I don't approve of blocks of text - but that was a well-deserved brick-to-the-face for anybody who believes Dumbass Dump is right in his "fake news" bullshit bluster. :P

[tyrlaan]

Net neutrality is such a scam argument. It didn’t exist before Obama magically coined the term to fix a problem that never existed. To fix the issues with the internet we need to apply antitrust laws and break the Comcast’s and Verizon’s up. Now are you asking if I think Netflix shouldn’t have to pay more when they consume 70% of the bandwidth in the country? I think they should

Besides the fact that if ISP overlords are allowed to be in the position to charge companies like Netflix for 'premium' bandwidth you can rest assured that same cost will turn into an increase in cost to consumers of Netflix, why exactly do you care?

You also realize that the death of net neutrality will hurt end users in the wallet pretty damn significantly right? And that it will allow ISPs to censor things they don't like right?

[Jeezy911]

So start a war, drive up debt with stupid tax cuts which accomplished nothing, poorly respond to a recession, and then blame it all on Obama after 8 years of "NO!"

Then you act shocked when Democrats get upset when republicans attempt to drive up the debt by the largest wealth redistribution since Reagan. You're damned right I'm upset about them driving up the debt to attempt using it as a tool to justify attacking the middle class.

Oh so it was Bush's fault Obama racked up a trillion dollars. Got it.