Isn't Trump right about the fake news?

[Edge-]

Invalidate? Maybe not completely, but it loses credibility; which just grows like a cancer for the same network. Just because you have easy expectations for large networks doesn't mean it is right. This is why our country is becoming so divided. One sides falls for Fox, and the other CNN. None of this shit should be acceptable.

CNN is incompetent, Fox is usually reasonably competent at their jobs (when they're not hard-shilling conspiracy theories masquerading as news). CNN is biased, but Fox is straight up propaganda. The two aren't remotely comparable.

News media is contributing to the polarization for sure, but they're hardly the cause of it. Well, except for maybe Fox News and all the damage they've done to their viewers over the years. When folks who don't even watch the news know more about what's going on than those who regularly watch Fox News, there are bigger issues with the network and its reporting.

[zEmini]

But it's not fake, it's just pointless. Fake news is literally that - news that is fake.

If we're going to devolve into "personal feels" definitions of words, then discussion becomes increasingly difficult as nobody is operating with the same definitions any longer.

That is your opinion and I don't share it. Gay use to mean corny/lame and happy - now look what it means?

And Fake is still the right definition. I guess I could call it "Misleading News" but woudln't misleading news not be real news?

News media is contributing to the polarization for sure, but they're hardly the cause of it. Well, except for maybe Fox News and all the damage they've done to their viewers over the years. When folks who don't even watch the news know more about what's going on than those who regularly watch Fox News, there are bigger issues with the network and its reporting.

But you see a lot of the same issues with magazines and other forms of media ... not just the internet. It is like journalists are picking a side and running with it - most likely because a paycheck is a paycheck. But then maybe the editors and producers are the true masterminds.

[Thekri]

Invalidate? Maybe not completely, but it loses credibility; which just grows like a cancer for the same network. Just because you have easy expectations for large networks doesn't mean it is right. This is why our country is becoming so divided. One sides falls for Fox, and the other CNN. None of this shit should be acceptable.

Ok, reasonable enough. I don't give media a pass on their sensationalized, entertainment driven approach to journalism either. The problem is that Trump is not "Right about fake news" as the title suggests, as he is trying to discredit the FACTS, not the news. You may not like the tone of the news, but that isn't the point. The point is that the facts they are reporting are accurate.

"Fake news" as defined by Donald Trump does not exist on the major networks, full stop. "Fake News" as defined by you might exist, since you seem to be throwing a much wider loop then he is, presumably with the intention of justifying the President's irrational and immoral comments.

[Xeones]

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

It's like it's impossible for you to discuss anything more complicated than 1+1.

[Stormspellz]

It's like it's impossible for you to discuss anything more complicated than 1+1.

only when its about criticizing the right, he becomes a poet of the serpent when its about criticizing, condemning, ect the left

[shimerra]

That is your opinion and I don't share it. Gay use to mean corny/lame and happy - now look what it means?

And Fake is still the right definition. I guess I could call it "Misleading News" but woudln't misleading news not be real news?



But you see a lot of the same issues with magazines and other forms of media ... not just the internet. It is like journalists are picking a side and running with it - most likely because a paycheck is a paycheck. But then maybe the editors and producers are the true masterminds.

Yeah you misusing a word isn't the same as a word changing meaning slowly over time. And no your opinion man doesn't cut it.

Article headlines have always been designed to lure readers into reading it with catchy, shocking, and sometimes slightly hyperbolic/misleading titles. The fact that folks like yourself are apparently too lazy to actually read it says more about you then the guy writing the click baity title. This has been a thing since printed media existed. It's also why "front page news" is part if the nomenclature and the boring stuff was shoved in the back/middle. "Click bait" to sell papers.

[Jeezy911]

It's like it's impossible for you to discuss anything more complicated than 1+1.

= 2 genders? Sorry but the national debt is really not an interesting topic that I care about, but Obama spent a ton of everyone else's money on Social programs and entitlements, which is almost worse than war because it ensures a permanent underclass of your own people. "We need to start the conversation on......." shut the fuck up, you honestly have never helped fix anything in your entire life with a round table discussion coming out like " I think we really made progress." You just don't have enough experience to understand how worthless this stuff really is.

- - - Updated - - -

only when its about criticizing the right, he becomes a poet of the serpent when its about criticizing, condemning, ect the left

Glad you are a fan.

[Wyrt]

= 2 genders? Sorry but the national debt is really not an interesting topic that I care about, but Obama spent a ton of everyone else's money on Social programs and entitlements, which is almost worse than war because it ensures a permanent underclass of your own people. "We need to start the conversation on......." shut the fuck up, you honestly have never helped fix anything in your entire life with a round table discussion coming out like " I think we really made progress." You just don't have enough experience to understand how worthless this stuff really is.

YEAH! The poor should just die off. Fuck them.

[Stormspellz]

= 2 genders? Sorry but the national debt is really not an interesting topic that I care about, but Obama spent a ton of everyone else's money on Social programs and entitlements, which is almost worse than war because it ensures a permanent underclass of your own people. "We need to start the conversation on......." shut the fuck up, you honestly have never helped fix anything in your entire life with a round table discussion coming out like " I think we really made progress." You just don't have enough experience to understand how worthless this stuff really is.

- - - Updated - - -



Glad you are a fan.

pointing out you are serial liar doesn't' mean I'm a fan

[Machismo]

That is your opinion and I don't share it. Gay use to mean corny/lame and happy - now look what it means?

And Fake is still the right definition. I guess I could call it "Misleading News" but woudln't misleading news not be real news?



But you see a lot of the same issues with magazines and other forms of media ... not just the internet. It is like journalists are picking a side and running with it - most likely because a paycheck is a paycheck. But then maybe the editors and producers are the true masterminds.

Are you that upset that the connotative meaning of a word has changed through the years, and has made its way into a dictionary?

- - - Updated - - -

= 2 genders? Sorry but the national debt is really not an interesting topic that I care about, but Obama spent a ton of everyone else's money on Social programs and entitlements, which is almost worse than war because it ensures a permanent underclass of your own people. "We need to start the conversation on......." shut the fuck up, you honestly have never helped fix anything in your entire life with a round table discussion coming out like " I think we really made progress." You just don't have enough experience to understand how worthless this stuff really is.

- - - Updated - - -



Glad you are a fan.

If you don't care about the deficit and debt, you don't get to then turn around and complain about Obama's spending like a drunken sailor. You complain about spending someone else's money, and say that you don't care about spending someone else's money in the same fucking paragraph. Jesus, make up your mind.

[Xeones]

= 2 genders? Sorry but the national debt is really not an interesting topic that I care about, but Obama spent a ton of everyone else's money on Social programs and entitlements, which is almost worse than war because it ensures a permanent underclass of your own people. "We need to start the conversation on......." shut the fuck up, you honestly have never helped fix anything in your entire life with a round table discussion coming out like " I think we really made progress." You just don't have enough experience to understand how worthless this stuff really is.

So it is better to kill people than fulfill the commitment of the constitution "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

[Danner]

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.

Have you heard about lugenpresse?

It's a term invented in Germany in the 1840s. Used by catholic circles to describe a hostile liberal press. The term was then used in later wars to describe war propaganda by intellectuals. The communists then used the term to describe the "burgeous press" not covering news from their perspective. The nazis adopted the term to describe any opposing view, especially foreign press. And in more modern times, it is used to describe celebrity scandal magazines.

All of that was "fake news". But still very different things.

• The catholics used it to label hostile journalists
• The intellectuals used it to label state-controlled agenda-driven propaganda
• It is used against the celebrity magazines to label fabricated stories told to sell papers.
• The communists used it to label media that didn't cover the world using their lenses
• And finally, the nazis used it to label media not controlled by them

Is trump facing type 1 fake news (hostile journalism inflating stories)?

Yes. He's obviously facing hostile journalists. That itself is perfectly evident. The Koi-feeding incident shows how even a misconception can turn into a world-travelling story of how bad trump is. There was no merit to that story, and it was told simply because the journalists posting it wanted it to be true rather than seeking to verify that it was.

But how is that really different from what Fox News did to Obama? I do not think it is.

The thing about this kind of news is that the people who do that news obviously hate the subject in question. They aren't "fair and unbiased", though they like to think they are. They will make grave, journalistic mistakes in the process. They will latch onto any thing that paints the "target" in a bad light, but they won't do it unless there is a merit to it. Or at least they think there is a merit to it. Essentially - they'll twist and turn the truth beyond sustainability - but they won't invent the stories. There is a core of truth to all these tales.

As much as I would love journalists to be less agenda-driven and instead stick to the facts (I still remember the gamergate shitshow), I believe this kind of "fake news" goes both ways. Trump is just facing what Fox News has been doing for a decade. I agree the world would be better if this kind of journalism didn't exist. Personally I do not think you need to make boulders out of pebbles when it comes to trump, his own policies and actions should be far adequate to discredit him on their own merit.

I am not a big fan of putting a leash on journalists. We need them to be independent and inquisitive, that's their mandate in society. Sometimes that means they overstep their boundaries. In Norway, we have such a leash in the form of a Press Review Board, but it is organized by the press desks themselves, and there isn't much consequence for being convicted - beyond the stigma. But this leash exist so that we don't end up in this situation. They police themselves, so others don't have to. And I can say straight away, that the Koi story, would have landed the journalist in question with a big fat "not responsible reporting" verdict here in Norway.

Is trump facing type 2 fake news (outright fabrication, by an organized agenda-driven agency)?

I do not think so, no.

There is no state-controlled agenda-driven propaganda against trump - at least to my knowledge. I'd argue there likely was one against Clinton, from Russia, but that's a separate concern; and frankly Clinton was her own worst enemy anyway.

So maybe not state driven? Can't it be some sort of vast and vague conspiracy of liberal media everywhere? I'm not gonna go tinfoil hat, and recommend any sane person to do the same. Type 1 matches what is going on far better than type 2, per Hanlon's Razor.

Is trump facing type 3 fake news? (outright fabrication, for profit)

Now, this is where it gets interesting. Because I cannot rule this out. Let's be honest, Trump stories sell. He's been in the media ever since he entered politics, and we have a full sub-forum on this forum dedicated to the man alone. There is a large segment of people, myself included, who really cannot stomach Trump. Obviously the business-savvy want in catering on that segment.

There is a fine line between the first three types. But the difference is motive. I find the type 1 fake news unhealthy, but I can understand them. I think the type 1 journalists are breaking all kinds of ethical rules by doing what they do, and I would very much like them to reflect, and I think they are needlessly making the world a worse place by them doing what they do - but it's not done with malice. Just simple political motivation.

This type of fake news, on the other hand, I have far less understanding for. This is just calculated. This is stirring up the pot, for no good reason, making a conflict out of a disagreement. It's creating warfronts of impossible reconciliation... and it's virtually indistinguishable from type 1.

I'll let you decide whether this exist. I do not know.

Is trump facing type 4 fake news? (journalism with different bias)

Or rather, can we apply this scenario to what Trump calls fake news?

IMO it is irrelevant, because it is not really fake news in any sensible meaning of the word.

This label is just normal discrediting, trying to flag someone as type 1-3 fake news, while not actually being this.
Disagreement on politics doesn't mean the opposition does "fake news". And this distinction I think is very important.
All we're then really asking is whether Trump is trying to discredit his critics by calling them fake news. Which admittedly is a good question.

Is trump facing type 5 fake news? (independent media not following the party line)

Or rather, can we apply this scenario to what Trump calls fake news?

I'd rather not answer that, because it goes hellishly close to Godwin's law. But - having that on the table as an argument is not a "good" thing, really. It means you want to control the press. We leave that kind of nonsense to dictators. Which is why people that do not aspire to be a dictator will never raise this kind of argument.

--

Let me know if there are other types of Fake News. I might have missed a few?

[Jeezy911]

If you don't care about the deficit and debt, you don't get to then turn around and complain about Obama's spending like a drunken sailor. You complain about spending someone else's money, and say that you don't care about spending someone else's money in the same fucking paragraph. Jesus, make up your mind.

I said I don't care about the subject because it is a boring topic, not that I don't care about swamp creatures always looking to tax me more to pay for social programs.

- - - Updated - - -

So it is better to kill people than fulfill the commitment of the constitution "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

Since I don't want the guy at the DMV to be in charge of my medical records I now want to kill people. What a jump.

[Machismo]

I said I don't care about the subject because it is a boring topic, not that I don't care about swamp creatures always looking to tax me more to pay for social programs.

- - - Updated - - -



Since I don't want the guy at the DMV to be in charge of my medical records I now want to kill people. What a jump.

So, it's selective outrage over the same thing. I love double standards...

[Daelak]

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 no fake news. It's just news that makes Trump pop a blood vessel while trolling on twitter on the shitter.

[Felya]

Let me know if there are other types of Fake News. I might have missed a few?

You are calling soft news, fake news, when you bring up the koi pond story. In fact, every instance of Trump calling things fake news, is either his disagreement or soft news. What Trump is doing, is saying that the story about a surfing squirrel is fake, because he has never seen a squirrel surf. Which means all news is fake...

[Danner]

You are calling soft news, fake news, when you bring up the koi pond story. In fact, every instance of Trump calling things fake news, is either his disagreement or soft news. What Trump is doing, is saying that the story about a surfing squirrel is fake, because he has never seen a squirrel surf. Which means all news is fake...

Well, it's all different types of ways to do "fake news", right? I think my main point is that these are not the same thing, at all.
I started thinking about yellow press, lugenpresse, clickbait, fabrication, propaganda... and found that lugenpresse kinda covered all those.

If a story runs worldwide that trump kills some fish by overfeeding them... well, it turned out to not actually be true. He did as instructed. No fish were harmed. Certainly this article was "fake news". But you have to look at the motivation. I certainly think the journalist writing that story was out to "get trump". He certainly wrote that article against his better judgement. But I do not think he wrote it against his better knowledge; he probably genuinely thought those fish were gonna die because of trump. The underlying problem here isn't that the article was incorrect. It is that the journalist threw away his journalistic judgement in order to "get trump".

And if we are looking at motivations; Trump's rationale for calling the story "fake news" is not okay. That is nothing more than an attempt to discredit the press as a whole. It works just like when the communists of 1920 germany claimed the burgeous newspapers were "lügenpresse". I think Trump does the exact same thing, and I think it stems from a desire to control the press. Which is not a good trait for a leader, at all. As such, we agree.

All the editors around the world passing that koi article around, did the same kind of error as the journalist who wrote it by the way.
Or did they? This is where I am not so certain.

Can you rule out that this wasn't just a type of clickbait?
Not about showing the truth, more about generating views?
What then makes these news agencies better than Weekly World News?
I find this question very difficult.

[Felya]

Well, it's all different types of ways to do "fake news", right? I think my main point is that these are not the same thing, at all.

Yes, but soft news has nothing to do with fake news. Reporting on Clinton’s burger habits, was not fake news. Just like this coy pond or a majority of reporting on Trump’s twitter rants. It was intended as an anecdote, not hard news that constitutes being called fake. Calling soft news, fake news, invalidates the term. As I said, a surfing squirrel is not fake news, just because there isn’t an outbreak of surfing squirrels... it’s soft news... an anecdote...

[unfilteredJW]

"Fake news" is such a diluted term now thanks to a bunch of knuckledraggers with egos so fucking big they think they can change the meanings of words.

Fake news is just that: false news reported. Anything else is YOU being an idiot.

[Jeezy911]

You seem confused. Typically you get taxed more to pay for tax cuts for rich people like Trump, it has nothing to do with paying for social programs.

Taxes have nothing to do with paying for social programs? GTFO with this stuff.