This is why fake news is dangerous

[Machismo]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/21030
150 people, $25-35k
Probably not what you'd consider large, but they did it regularly.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/48531
Over $40k, though not sure if same or different or whatever.



Again, afaik the place doesn't have secret sub basements, or any basement at all. The conspiracies all centered around things not physically present. They also tied the Haitian stuff to it, though I'm not sure if there is even a Haitian project place nearby or whatever. So again, rather than the simple "it's about money" they went for some conspiracy about Haitian kids being traded.

- - - Updated - - -



Well there is that element too, where when the information is getting suppressed, it's further proof of a vast conspiracy!

I've done my fair share of work around DC though the years. I've popped into a pizza shop (We the Pizza, amazing place to eat), and overheard a policy meeting by a few congressmen and others. I've seen them hold meetings at food trucks and hot dog stands.

Now, there are quite a few exclusive private clubs around DC that may dabble in high-end prostitution and escorts for dignitaries, politicians, ambassadors, and whatnot. Those aren't in pizza shops, they are run out of brownstones that are worth millions of dollars.

A place that would be moving children for sex trafficking would have to be beyond discreet. It would charge their customers a shit ton of money, and wouldn't want the public anywhere near it. That would be far more likely to be run out of one of the brownstones, townhomes, or small exclusive apartment complexes.

[Svifnymr]

I've done my fair share of work around DC though the years. I've popped into a pizza shop (We the Pizza, amazing place to eat), and overheard a policy meeting by a few congressmen and others. I've seen them hold meetings at food trucks and hot dog stands.

Fundraising for the DNC, not lunch meeting.

Now, there are quite a few exclusive private clubs around DC that may dabble in high-end prostitution and escorts for dignitaries, politicians, ambassadors, and whatnot. Those aren't in pizza shops, they are run out of brownstones that are worth millions of dollars.

A place that would be moving children for sex trafficking would have to be beyond discreet. It would charge their customers a shit ton of money, and wouldn't want the public anywhere near it. That would be far more likely to be run out of one of the brownstones, townhomes, or small exclusive apartment complexes.

Again, Diners, Drive Ins and Dives did an episode on Comet years ago. I looked on youtube and didn't see a copy there to link for amusement purposes. Now, I mean, I guess it's possible that between season 9 (I guess like 15-20 years ago) and the stories, they could have added extensive tunnel networks with hidden passages and stuff out of scooby doo, but it seems unlikely to me.

[Machismo]

Fundraising for the DNC, not lunch meeting.



Again, Diners, Drive Ins and Dives did an episode on Comet years ago. I looked on youtube and didn't see a copy there to link for amusement purposes. Now, I mean, I guess it's possible that between season 9 (I guess like 15-20 years ago) and the stories, they could have added extensive tunnel networks with hidden passages and stuff out of scooby doo, but it seems unlikely to me.

Of course not, that's why it's so ridiculous. I have yet to eat there, because I'm rarely in that part of DC.

This was a bullshit story pushed by people who get paid to lie to ignorant fools.

[Volardelis]

fixed that for you. If news started going around that i have real suspicious looking tomatoes in my basement i both confirmed and denied exist, i would clean house that same day.

How can they clean a basement, if they never had a basement?

That was the ultimate flaw of pizzagate.

[Melusine]

Ok. Do I have to get the fucking crayons out and spell it out for you? Because the Comet Ping Pong Pizza place wasn't holding children in a pedophile ring, but places like Infowars and their ilk reported that it was happening. Comet was attacked by a nutbar follower because of this FAKE FUCKING NEWS STORY, and therefore THIS IS WHY FAKE NEWS IS DANGEROUS. Jesus christ, I don't know how to dumb it down any further for you.

- - - Updated - - -



1. That wasn't the case, because he was sued TWICE by the DoJ and lost both times. So apparently they could pay.
2. He didn't disparage ILLEGALS, he disparaged ALL Mexicans, saying Mexico was sending these people.
3. If it was a Muslim ban and was temporary, supposedly 90 days, why has it not expired since it has been in effect since December? And how are Muslims incompatible with the US? We already have 1 religion trying to run this country and literally destroying it.

Also the rest of your rant is straight up false. Obama didn't stop anyone from coming here, he slowed them down from Iraq for a few weeks, but didn't outright ban them from coming here.

And your bullshit about CNN is false. Not surprising that you are defending Trump. You are gullible.

1. Horse shit.
2. If Mexico is sending them, they are doing so illegally. This is splitting hairs. The people he said nothing about were the LEGAL immigrants, and the ones still living there. Sniping a government is not the same as sniping at its people.
3. Extensions happen, and the reason for the extensions are that the ban keeps getting challenged, and the vetting process is impossibly difficult when no one can prove that they are who they are.

And to your bullshit, I assume you mean Christianity is "fucking up the country", and you cannot prove that. But what I will say is, I would much rather live in a country founded in the Western world under Christian values, as opposed to live in an Islamic country founded under the pedophile prophet Muhammed (piss be upon him), and under Sharia law. That says it all. Sharia Law is incompatible with the Western World... period, full stop, mic drop.

I see you've swallowed the Kool-Aid too much. CNN IS FAKE GOD DAMN NEWS!!! They have been exposed over and over and over again, and continue acting as if none of that shit happened, almost the same as how you refuse to accept that as fact. the list of countries came from he Obama administration, and he simply didn't enact it, probably because he was about to be out of the seat of the presidency and leave it to another president. Trump simply had the balls to do it.

And the people of Germany as Sweden would like to have a word with you about foreign invaders of the raghead sort. The number of terrorism attacks have been more numerous in the last two years since they were let in, than has been in the last 20 years, and that is not a coincidence. ISIS said they would do it... they're doing it, and certain asshole leaders of those countries are letting it happen and turning a blind eye when it does, almost as if they want their countries overthrown.

[Judgedredd]

No, I don't call them fake news because of their opinions, I call them fake news, because that is what they post.

Breitbart has claimed that illegal immigrants set the California wildfires in October of 2017 simply because an illegal was arrested.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/im...nia-wildfires/
http://archive.is/ZFcEt

Or that Breitbart claimed that Planned Parenthood and Satanists "teamed up" to reverse restrictions in Missouri on abortion.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pl...ood-satanists/
http://archive.is/NM7sQ
They had nothing to do with each other, they made separate lawsuits against Missouri over their abortion.

I can probably post 100 more "articles" from Breitbart that are all false. So that in turn makes Breitbart fake news for fucking sure.

And Fox News, well, lets see. They let Hannity report the fake news that Seth Rich was killed by the DNC and that he was the leaker instead of the Russians hacking the DNC. You know, like every intelligence agency under Obama AND Trump have said, same with the Senate Intel committee.

That right there is enough for me to get rid of Fox news as a news agency forever. Hannity should have been fired, and the next night, the host that should have stood in for him, should have issued an hour long apology to the family, the DNC, and everyone that was involved in the bullshit story that Hannity posted.

- - - Updated - - -



You didn't fix that for me, you made it fake, BECAUSE THEY NEVER HELD FUCKING KIDS FOR A PEDOPHILE SEX RING. Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit.

- - - Updated - - -



No, fake news, is outright fabricated bullshit. Like Breitbart and Fox does.

Political orientation of these 'fact checking' websites? And by that everyone who works there should disclose their voting choice in the most recent election.

Who facts check the fact checkers?

Also, you could have said that because you prolly voted Hillary is a good enough reason to get rid of Fox News and right wing news organisations et al, which you so desultorily call fake news as an invective.

- - - Updated - - -

TLDR of this thread, if you voted Trump, CNN, Huff Post, BBC and mainstream media et al is fake news.

If you voted Hillary, then Fox News, Breitbart and other right wing news media et al is fake news.

Such a simple rule.

[Orbitus]

1. Horse shit.
2. If Mexico is sending them, they are doing so illegally. This is splitting hairs. The people he said nothing about were the LEGAL immigrants, and the ones still living there. Sniping a government is not the same as sniping at its people.
3. Extensions happen, and the reason for the extensions are that the ban keeps getting challenged, and the vetting process is impossibly difficult when no one can prove that they are who they are.

And to your bullshit, I assume you mean Christianity is "fucking up the country", and you cannot prove that. But what I will say is, I would much rather live in a country founded in the Western world under Christian values, as opposed to live in an Islamic country founded under the pedophile prophet Muhammed (piss be upon him), and under Sharia law. That says it all. Sharia Law is incompatible with the Western World... period, full stop, mic drop.

I see you've swallowed the Kool-Aid too much. CNN IS FAKE GOD DAMN NEWS!!! They have been exposed over and over and over again, and continue acting as if none of that shit happened, almost the same as how you refuse to accept that as fact. the list of countries came from he Obama administration, and he simply didn't enact it, probably because he was about to be out of the seat of the presidency and leave it to another president. Trump simply had the balls to do it.

And the people of Germany as Sweden would like to have a word with you about foreign invaders of the raghead sort. The number of terrorism attacks have been more numerous in the last two years since they were let in, than has been in the last 20 years, and that is not a coincidence. ISIS said they would do it... they're doing it, and certain asshole leaders of those countries are letting it happen and turning a blind eye when it does, almost as if they want their countries overthrown.

1. Not horse shit. https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/49595...imination-case
2. Mexico wasn't sending them. That's the bullshit here.
3. Sure extensions happen, but nothing happened here. Nothing was reported, no extension was made. He didn't even attempt to make a committee or whatever to make his "extreme vetting" happen. He doesn't care, he was just playing to his retarded base.

Great, calling Muslims ragheads, no wonder you are fucking racist.

I don't watch CNN, but I know that CNN isn't fake news. They may get something wrong every now and again, but they don't outright post fake news stories like Fox does or whatever bullshit you watch.

- - - Updated - - -

Political orientation of these 'fact checking' websites? And by that everyone who works there should disclose their voting choice in the most recent election.

Who facts check the fact checkers?

Also, you could have said that because you prolly voted Hillary is a good enough reason to get rid of Fox News and right wing news organisations et al, which you so desultorily call fake news as an invective.

- - - Updated - - -

TLDR of this thread, if you voted Trump, CNN, Huff Post, BBC and mainstream media et al is fake news.

If you voted Hillary, then Fox News, Breitbart and other right wing news media et al is fake news.

Such a simple rule.

Doesn't matter what political orientation they are if they source their claims.

I don't want to get rid of right wing news sources, I want to hold them accountable to post real stories and not leave shit out. I want the Fairness Doctrine back. If they can't post real news with the doctrine back, then they deserve to wither and die.

If you voted Trump and believe those places are fake news, then you are part of the problem.

If you voted Hillary and say those are fake news, you are probably right. Because every time those places get fact checked they are usually wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

And to your bullshit, I assume you mean Christianity is "fucking up the country", and you cannot prove that. But what I will say is, I would much rather live in a country founded in the Western world under Christian values, as opposed to live in an Islamic country founded under the pedophile prophet Muhammed (piss be upon him), and under Sharia law. That says it all. Sharia Law is incompatible with the Western World... period, full stop, mic drop.

Christians are making this country STUPID. Passing laws to ban abortion, passing laws to try to make gay marriage illegal again, and don't forget that Christians are the ones making their own laws that are the equivalent to Sharia law. Christians are carrying out most of the terrorism in this country. And FYI, this country wasn't founded on "Christian Values".

[Melusine]

1. Not horse shit. https://www.npr.org/2016/09/29/49595...imination-case

From that article....
"We settled the suit with zero, with no admission of guilt."

Interesting... And considering this article is almost a relic of the Civil Rights Era, holy shit... But, again, settled, no admission of guilt. Do you even bother reading it all the way through?

2. Mexico wasn't sending them. That's the bullshit here.

Creating conditions that would have its people trying to get into another country IS sending them here. When you make the alternative of staying in your own country so bad, the best course of action is to illegally migrate into another country, you are tacitly sending them here. Just because they are not being brought into the government offices and instructed to go there doesn't mean they have no hand in why it's happening.

3. Sure extensions happen, but nothing happened here. Nothing was reported, no extension was made. He didn't even attempt to make a committee or whatever to make his "extreme vetting" happen. He doesn't care, he was just playing to his retarded base.

No, he's so busy dealing with frivolous challenges to his authority be obstructionist judges who get triggered everytime Trump uses his authority to do something, there hasn't been much time to do anything, and that shit needs to stop.

Great, calling Muslims ragheads, no wonder you are fucking racist.

Muslims aren't a race, so you don't get to call me a racist because I don't like Islam. I know you're aware of this, and that makes your argument disingenuous.

I don't watch CNN, but I know that CNN isn't fake news. They may get something wrong every now and again, but they don't outright post fake news stories like Fox does or whatever bullshit you watch.

I'll just leave these links here....

https://www.dailywire.com/news/16711...ews-john-nolte
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...rakes-fakenews
https://www.breitbart.com/2016-presi...es-fact-check/
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...cnn-producer-/
https://yesimright.com/busted-cnn-ca...investigation/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UQr3inDqTU

And this only scratches the surface!!!

I don't want to get rid of right wing news sources, I want to hold them accountable to post real stories and not leave shit out. I want the Fairness Doctrine back. If they can't post real news with the doctrine back, then they deserve to wither and die.

As long as it goes both ways.... I don't care.

If you voted Trump and believe those places are fake news, then you are part of the problem.

In your stupid opinion, maybe, but you'd have a really difficult time proving it. I could say the same about voting for Hillary Clinton after she fucked Bernie Sanders out of the presidency that you have no principles, but I won't do that.... See how fucked up that is??

If you voted Hillary and say those are fake news, you are probably right. Because every time those places get fact checked they are usually wrong.

This is a lie so intense, a polygraph wouldn't survive it.

Christians are making this country STUPID.

No no… our educators are making the people stupid. In university, you see programs that are so diametrically opposed to actual useful knowledge and skills, the students coming out are dumber than they were when they went in... and are now $60,000+ dollars in debt so they can work at God Damned Starbucks. People don't pay attention to Christians in an appreciable fashion anymore that it affects laws pertaining to anything. Acting like it does is both disingenuous and functionally retarded

Passing laws to ban abortion,

Gotta love the Demonkrats who think this is a good practice. Perhaps if they would stop this shit, they may not be compelled to import a new culture to replace voters that they killed in the womb. Personally, keep doing it. We can deal with getting foreign invaders out of this country easier than children being born.

passing laws to try to make gay marriage illegal again,

Marriage is a fucking joke, especially if you're a man. And yes, while I oppose gay marriage, I also oppose straight marriage, precisely because everything our fucking government touches turns to shit, not gold. At least I'm being consistent, though. Nothing that a marriage can offer cannot be duplicated in law that would also prevent the legal attachments to a significant other without all the malicious side effects no fault divorce has plagued our country with. Acting like it is a sacrament that should be valued in society, that is just stupid. The people getting married too often don't honor it, why should anyone else?

and don't forget that Christians are the ones making their own laws that are the equivalent to Sharia law.

BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!!!

Now you've demonstrated yourself to be a liar, so, I'm done with this shit.

Christians are carrying out most of the terrorism in this country. And FYI, this country wasn't founded on "Christian Values".

And this right here is why trusting a libtard is like sticking your hand in a hungry crocodile's mouth. You're guaranteed to come out of the exchange without a hand.

Don't be like this guy....

[Netherius]

Just because you keep saying it, doesn't make any of it true. Hell here you are in a thread bitching about his lack of fact-checking, yet you have no facts to support this claim. In fact, historical evidence suggests otherwise, but don't let that interfere with your OccupyDemocrats-esque narratives...

There is a whole list of racially charged crimes or motives that Trump has used before he was even President. It's just common knowledge at this point. You have the exact same google as the rest of us, and no one is going to apologize to you for your unwillingness to accept the truth.

- - - Updated - - -

Christians are carrying out most of the terrorism in this country. And FYI, this country wasn't founded on "Christian Values".
And this right here is why trusting a libtard is like sticking your hand in a hungry crocodile's mouth. You're guaranteed to come out of the exchange without a hand.

Don't be like this guy....

"There were almost twice as many terrorist incidents by right-wing extremists as by Islamist extremists in the U.S. from 2008 to 2016, according to a new report from The Nation Institute’s Investigative Fund and The Center for Investigative Reporting’s Reveal.

Looking at both plots and attacks carried out, the group tracked 201 terrorist incidents on U.S. soil from January 2008 to the end of 2016. The database shows 115 cases by right-wing extremists ― from white supremacists to militias to “sovereign citizens” ― compared to 63 cases by Islamist extremists. Incidents from left-wing extremists, which include ecoterrorists and animal rights militants, were comparatively rare, with 19 incidents."

"According to START, Muslim extremist violence killed seven times more people than far-right extremist violence between 1990 and 2016, despite five times fewer fatal attacks. However, this period included the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the attacks of 11 September 2001, the two deadliest terrorist incidents in American history. When those outliers are removed from the figures, according to START, far-right extremist violence caused 272 deaths between 1990 and 2016 — more than twice as many as the 130 deaths from Islamic extremism during the same period."

Far-right and Christian related terrorism has been a problem in this country for centuries. You don't have to like that, hell I would be pissed, but that doesn't make it not true. You don't get to disown it. Instead it gets called fake news because people like you reject reality. Then you go on social media and make shit head comments like "Dumb protesters should just be ran over"- and then some twenty-nothing impressionable kid takes it to heart and actually does it. THAT is the problem, the facts aren't the problem.

- - - Updated - - -

Gotta love the Demonkrats who think this is a good practice. Perhaps if they would stop this shit, they may not be compelled to import a new culture to replace voters that they killed in the womb. Personally, keep doing it. We can deal with getting foreign invaders out of this country easier than children being born.

Gotta love Repulicunts who are anti-liberty whenever it serves their needs.

[Orbitus]

From that article....
"We settled the suit with zero, with no admission of guilt."

Interesting... And considering this article is almost a relic of the Civil Rights Era, holy shit... But, again, settled, no admission of guilt. Do you even bother reading it all the way through?



Creating conditions that would have its people trying to get into another country IS sending them here. When you make the alternative of staying in your own country so bad, the best course of action is to illegally migrate into another country, you are tacitly sending them here. Just because they are not being brought into the government offices and instructed to go there doesn't mean they have no hand in why it's happening.



No, he's so busy dealing with frivolous challenges to his authority be obstructionist judges who get triggered everytime Trump uses his authority to do something, there hasn't been much time to do anything, and that shit needs to stop.



Muslims aren't a race, so you don't get to call me a racist because I don't like Islam. I know you're aware of this, and that makes your argument disingenuous.



I'll just leave these links here....

https://www.dailywire.com/news/16711...ews-john-nolte
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...rakes-fakenews
https://www.breitbart.com/2016-presi...es-fact-check/
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...cnn-producer-/
https://yesimright.com/busted-cnn-ca...investigation/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UQr3inDqTU

And this only scratches the surface!!!



As long as it goes both ways.... I don't care.



In your stupid opinion, maybe, but you'd have a really difficult time proving it. I could say the same about voting for Hillary Clinton after she fucked Bernie Sanders out of the presidency that you have no principles, but I won't do that.... See how fucked up that is??



This is a lie so intense, a polygraph wouldn't survive it.



No no… our educators are making the people stupid. In university, you see programs that are so diametrically opposed to actual useful knowledge and skills, the students coming out are dumber than they were when they went in... and are now $60,000+ dollars in debt so they can work at God Damned Starbucks. People don't pay attention to Christians in an appreciable fashion anymore that it affects laws pertaining to anything. Acting like it does is both disingenuous and functionally retarded



Gotta love the Demonkrats who think this is a good practice. Perhaps if they would stop this shit, they may not be compelled to import a new culture to replace voters that they killed in the womb. Personally, keep doing it. We can deal with getting foreign invaders out of this country easier than children being born.



Marriage is a fucking joke, especially if you're a man. And yes, while I oppose gay marriage, I also oppose straight marriage, precisely because everything our fucking government touches turns to shit, not gold. At least I'm being consistent, though. Nothing that a marriage can offer cannot be duplicated in law that would also prevent the legal attachments to a significant other without all the malicious side effects no fault divorce has plagued our country with. Acting like it is a sacrament that should be valued in society, that is just stupid. The people getting married too often don't honor it, why should anyone else?



BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!!!

Now you've demonstrated yourself to be a liar, so, I'm done with this shit.



And this right here is why trusting a libtard is like sticking your hand in a hungry crocodile's mouth. You're guaranteed to come out of the exchange without a hand.

Don't be like this guy....

I have been on vacation from the forums for a week, but without looking at anything from your post but your links, and I can say without a shadow of a doubt that you are wrong.

Zerohedge, Breitbart, DailyWire, Washington Times, and whoever the fuck yesiamright.com is are all partisan hacks and then you post a bullshit video from Tim Pool, a fucking nazi apologist? Fuck off with this bullshit.

[Mormolyce]

Lol, people still don't get it:

For the left, Breitbart and the like is fake news.

For the right, CNN and just about every other non conservative news outlet is fake news.

The only objective thing about fake news is that it is political invective. The real root of this 'fake news' problem is polarisation of society, which has its roots in something else.

That's a false equivalence. First of all, Breitbart and CNN may both have a partisan ideological bias, but that's not the same as outright false or deliberately misleading reporting. CNN is not remotely in Breitbart's league for that.

Analysis / Bias

Breitbart consist of various sections called Big Government, Big Journalism, Big Hollywood, National Security, Tech, Sports, and Wired.

Breitbart uses sensational emotionally loaded language in their headlines such as “Obama Loses 2 Million+ Followers During Twitter Fake Account Purge.” They utilize sources such as tabloid entertainment magazine Variety, and credible sources such as Bloomberg. as well as factually mixed sources such as the Daily Mail. Under the Big Hollywood section they publish tabloid stories such as “Fashion Notes: Melania Trump is Posh and Proper for Final Day in England” utilizing fashion sources such as farfetch.com

In general, the majority of published stories favor the right and are highly pro-Trump in tone and story selection.

A factual search reveals numerous failed fact checks by IFCN Fact Checkers. Here are just a few of many as an example:

Overall, we rate Breitbart Questionable based on extreme right wing bias and publication of numerous false claims.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breitbart/

Analysis / Bias

CNN has a left bias in story selection that often favors the left while being critical of the right. For example, during the 2016 Presidential Election Pew Research concluded that the majority of CNN stories covering President Donald Trump were negative. While less dramatic, Pew also determined that more stories were negative toward Presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012.

CNN typically utilizes loaded emotional words in sensational headlines such as this: Trump pounces on Justice Department report findings. CNN usually sources its news properly through credible reporters/journalists and through hyperlinking to credible media sources. However, CNN has failed numerous fact checks from Politifact. It should be noted that these fact checks were almost exclusively from guests on their numerous talk shows and not from the reporting of actual news, which tends to be factual.

Overall, we rate CNN left biased based on story selection that often favors the left. We rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to misinformation and failed fact checks from guests and pundits. However, CNN’s straight news reporting would earn a High rating for factual reporting. (5/16/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 6/15/2018)

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

CNN is more closely matched to Fox, however Fox still has a lower factual rating:

According to a Pew Research Center survey “Fox News was the main source for 40% of Trump voters” during the 2016 election. Further, another Pew Survey indicates “When it comes to choosing a media source for political news, conservatives orient strongly around Fox News. Nearly half of consistent conservatives (47%) name it as their main source for government and political news.”

Fox News typically looks at the issues from a conservative perspective and also has a number of on air personalities that are strong supporters of Trump, such as Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Bret Baier, Laura Ingraham, Eric Bolling, Tomi Lahren, and Shepard Smith (critical of Trump from time to time). Fox News typically skews conservative as there is less criticism of Trump, therefore the majority of stories are pro-Trump.

In review, Fox News publishes stories with emotionally loaded headlines such as “’They Wanted It to Blow Up’: Limbaugh Says Success of Trump-Kim Summit Caught Media Off Guard” and “Tucker: 2016 Russia Collusion ‘Witch Hunt’ Now Extends to Jill Stein.” When it comes to sourcing they typically utilize pro-Trump pundits such as Rush Limbaugh who has a very poor record with fact checkers, as well as credible sources such as the Wall Street Journal. Fox News is also known to publish right wing conspiracy theories, although after being sued they retracted the story. Fox News has also been deemed the least accurate cable news source according to Politifact.

Overall, we rate Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to word and story selection that favors the right and Mixed factually based on poor sourcing and spreading conspiracy theories that later must be retracted.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/

There isn't really a direct left wing equivalent to Breitbart. I mean, there no doubt is but it'd be really obscure and neither of us would've likely heard of it.

Fake news is more than simply news with an ideological spin. Deliberately non-factual reporting is a different axis on the chart entirely.

[Endus]

That's a false equivalence. First of all, Breitbart and CNN may both have a partisan ideological bias, but that's not the same as outright false or deliberately misleading reporting. CNN is not remotely in Breitbart's league for that.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breitbart/


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

CNN is more closely matched to Fox, however Fox still has a lower factual rating:


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/

There isn't really a direct left wing equivalent to Breitbart. I mean, there no doubt is but it'd be really obscure and neither of us would've likely heard of it.

Fake news is more than simply news with an ideological spin. Deliberately non-factual reporting is a different axis on the chart entirely.

I've said this a few times, but people seem to focus way too much on the "bias" section of Media Bias Fact Check, and not enough on the "factual reporting" section.

The site uses "bias" in the way it's used in historical research; every source has some bias, even if it's just viewpoint bias. Someone on the South side of a house may tell you that the house is white, when the North wall is red, and that's because of his "bias". It doesn't mean that facts are misrepresented, it means the source has a particular viewpoint. Any opinion writer is going to have "bias", because if they didn't, they wouldn't be writing. It's important to understand how a source leans, but that lean does not call its honesty and accuracy into question.

For that, you look at the factual reporting measure.

The example I usually use as a comparison to Fox News in this is Vox. Their media bias analysis shows a fairly strong left-wing bias, but they have high factual reporting and have never failed a fact check; https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/vox/


To sum this all up another way, bias is about opinion, not fact. Feel free to disagree with opinions you don't agree with. You don't get to pick your own facts. And an opinion you disagree with is not, solely by you disagreeing with it, non-factual.

[Judgedredd]

That's a false equivalence. First of all, Breitbart and CNN may both have a partisan ideological bias, but that's not the same as outright false or deliberately misleading reporting. CNN is not remotely in Breitbart's league for that.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breitbart/


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

CNN is more closely matched to Fox, however Fox still has a lower factual rating:


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/

There isn't really a direct left wing equivalent to Breitbart. I mean, there no doubt is but it'd be really obscure and neither of us would've likely heard of it.

Fake news is more than simply news with an ideological spin. Deliberately non-factual reporting is a different axis on the chart entirely.

Will those 'fact checkers' disclose their voting and party preferences, instead of remaining faceless individuals? Thought not.

Until that happens, their claims of being 'impartial' are hollow. Its basically a jury of blues judging reds. They even admit there are more right wing news sources in their fake news list if you check the methodology page.

As I've been saying countless times in this thread the root of the problem is polarisation of society, which has its origins well before the phenomenon of fake news. All fake news is now is a term to debase the other side. Whether the event is real or not, the likes of Trump is just going to bandy the term around to put the Democrats down.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...-up-with-trump

Here's a guardian article that details the problem. And Guardian is as left-wing as they come.

[Machismo]

Will those 'fact checkers' disclose their voting and party preferences, instead of remaining faceless individuals? Thought not.

Until that happens, their claims of being 'impartial' are hollow. Its basically a jury of blues judging reds. They even admit there are more right wing news sources in their fake news list if you check the methodology page.

As I've been saying countless times in this thread the root of the problem is polarisation of society, which has its origins well before the phenomenon of fake news. All fake news is now is a term to debase the other side. Whether the event is real or not, the likes of Trump is just going to bandy the term around to put the Democrats down.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...-up-with-trump

Here's a guardian article that details the problem. And Guardian is as left-wing as they come.

Facts don't care about your opinion... or something like that.

[Endus]

Will those 'fact checkers' disclose their voting and party preferences, instead of remaining faceless individuals? Thought not.

Until that happens, their claims of being 'impartial' are hollow. Its basically a jury of blues judging reds. They even admit there are more right wing news sources in their fake news list if you check the methodology page.

You freely admit you have absolutely no factual grounds on which to contest their results. You make a false assumption that more right-wing sources spreading fake news is somehow evidence of manipulation by Mediabiasfactcheck, when the alternative explanation, that right-wing sources are more likely to lie about things these days, somehow never occurs to you.

It's particularly egregious when their methodology is publicly stated; https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/
Nor are they "faceless"; their main writers/contributors are all listed right here; https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/about/

You literally could not find any evidence that they were biased or manipulating data, so you just assumed they must be, because you don't like the facts. That's your argument.

You're part of the problem, mate.

[Belize]

@Melusine

You missed Stormfront and RT from your list of "sources"
I sincerely hope you don't actually read that literal garbage amd take any of it seriously. You'd be pathetic if you did, and I prefer to think the best of people.

[SherriMayim]

well when all the media does is show the "Death to America" Iranians what do you expect?

call NBC, tell them to do a special on iranian puppies and the children who love them. might sway some of us.

I don't think that'll go over as well as you think it would...

[Judgedredd]

I've said this a few times, but people seem to focus way too much on the "bias" section of Media Bias Fact Check, and not enough on the "factual reporting" section.

The site uses "bias" in the way it's used in historical research; every source has some bias, even if it's just viewpoint bias. Someone on the South side of a house may tell you that the house is white, when the North wall is red, and that's because of his "bias". It doesn't mean that facts are misrepresented, it means the source has a particular viewpoint. Any opinion writer is going to have "bias", because if they didn't, they wouldn't be writing. It's important to understand how a source leans, but that lean does not call its honesty and accuracy into question.

For that, you look at the factual reporting measure.

The example I usually use as a comparison to Fox News in this is Vox. Their media bias analysis shows a fairly strong left-wing bias, but they have high factual reporting and have never failed a fact check; https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/vox/


To sum this all up another way, bias is about opinion, not fact. Feel free to disagree with opinions you don't agree with. You don't get to pick your own facts. And an opinion you disagree with is not, solely by you disagreeing with it, non-factual.

Political facts are not like scientific ones. If anyone denies that gravity exists, then as Richard Dawkins once retorted, that person is more than welcome to go to the top of a ten storey building and jump off to prove or not prove it (ofc the former).

As for political facts, you cannot say with the same objectivity that democracy is a better form of government than autocracy or vice versa, or that one civilisation is better than the other. As political systems are always going to be a means to achieving order of some sort, there is never going to be a political truth.

Apart from Marx's observation that those who control both the means of production and coercion wield all the power. This theory is easily proven by questioning those with implied monopoly of legitimate violence and the bloody aftermath or by perishing due to lack of sustenance due to lack of a certain resource being produced.

As for this fact checking website, why are the individuals doing the 'fact checking' faceless? Ironic they love to preach accountability and transparency yet are so opaque.

[Machismo]

Political facts are not like scientific ones. If anyone denies that gravity exists, then as Richard Dawkins once retorted, that person is more than welcome to go to the top of a ten storey building and jump off to prove or not prove it (ofc the former).

As for political facts, you cannot say with the same objectivity that democracy is a better form of government than autocracy or vice versa, or that one civilisation is better than the other. As political systems are always going to be a means to achieving order of some sort, there is never going to be a political truth.

Apart from Marx's observation that those who control both the means of production and coercion wield all the power. This theory is easily proven by questioning those with implied monopoly of legitimate violence and the bloody aftermath or by perishing due to lack of sustenance due to lack of a certain resource being produced.

As for this fact checking website, why are the individuals doing the 'fact checking' faceless? Ironic they love to preach accountability and transparency yet are so opaque.

Then that is not a fact, but an opinion... do you know the difference?

[Endus]

Political facts are not like scientific ones. If anyone denies that gravity exists, then as Richard Dawkins once retorted, that person is more than welcome to go to the top of a ten storey building and jump off to prove or not prove it (ofc the former).

As for political facts, you cannot say with the same objectivity that democracy is a better form of government than autocracy or vice versa, or that one civilisation is better than the other. As political systems are always going to be a means to achieving order of some sort, there is never going to be a political truth.

Really, what you're talking about here is that you, personally, have no comprehension of what a "fact" is. Neither of your two examples of "political facts" are facts at all.

As for this fact checking website, why are the individuals doing the 'fact checking' faceless? Ironic they love to preach accountability and transparency yet are so opaque.

They literally aren't "faceless". I linked you right to the "About" page which identifies them. You either couldn't be arsed to make any effort at all to check before spouting off, or you're deliberately lying to cast the site in a negative light because they expose some facts you don't want people to be aware of. Take your pick as to your motive.