6 ms·

"Fake news" is itself fake news. Look at the timing: immediately after Clinton lost, a consensus emerged among the losers that we have to do something about all

by fdsaaf 10y ago

"Fake news" is itself fake news. Look at the timing: immediately after Clinton lost, a consensus emerged among the losers that we have to do something about all the "fake news" floating around the internet. The timing is a huge DNC banner in the sky. The whole fake news hullabaloo is obviously partisan. It provides a psychological relief valve that allows the left to blame its terrible loss on some external evil. It also provides the left a mental system for justifying literal censorship of the right. "Fake news" isn't about public responsibility. It's a strategy for winning the next election.

cloakandswagger 10y ago
It's really a last ditch effort for the MSM to remain relevant by appointing themselves as the only source of "real" news. The election was hugely damaging to them, as most outlets predicted a Clinton victory with certainty, and their bias was on full display (see: the Clinton campaign giving direct orders to some journalists). The surge in "fake news" hysteria is simply a way to discredit any independent news source.
- JacobJans 10y ago
  You don't seem to be aware of the actual fake news that was spread very widely during the election. For example, an article claiming the Pope endorsed Donald Trump was shared millions of times on Facebook. This is objectively false. Literally fake. The problem of fake news is not about independent news sources, it is about active deception.
  - PretzelFisch 10y ago
    At this point, it's become partisan. Some how bias and opinion/click bait head lines are now fake news. Someone has moved the argument, And it has been an amazingly effective tactic.
michaelchisari 10y ago
Regardless of the election, the fact that stories like: "Obama Signs Executive Order Banning The Pledge Of Allegience In Schools Nationwide" This got 2,177,000 shares on Facebook. These are the issue. I'm of the mind that Hillary Clinton lost because she was a lackluster candidate who didn't address blue collar issues properly, thinking that anti-poverty and welfare programs would be equivalent. But just because the Democrats are sounding the alarm for reasons you find partisan, doesn't mean the problem goes away. Fake news is the social web's version of fwd: fwd: fwd:, and we've always known that was hugely problematic. Well, now it's gone viral on a global scale. We can't ignore that.
- specialist 10y ago
  "...Hillary Clinton lost because she was a lackluster candidate who didn't address blue collar issues properly, thinking that anti-poverty and welfare programs would be equivalent." This is mostly correct. HRC didn't win enough. Democratic candidates have to also overcome structural flaws in our system. HRC didn't inspire like Obama and Bernie did. IMHO, her biggest mistake was getting into the gutter with Trump with all the negative attacks. Obama didn't do that. Voters are sick of it, so those Obama voters simply stayed home. But she's a Clinton. The War Room & triangulation strategies that worked so well before failed her in 2008 primary and 2016 general. Too bad she didn't learn from Obama's campaign successes.
  - ktRolster 10y ago
    all the negative attacks. Obama didn't do that. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/07/23/obama-wins-attack-ad-battle-online/ http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/07/23/obama-wins-attack-a... "Did Obama run the most negative ads in us history?" (Probably not, but he ran a lot of them. The article goes into detail on numbers) https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-obama-run-the-most-negative-ads-in-us-history/2012/02/01/gIQAYUkriQ_blog.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-o... The reality is, negative ads work, so politicians will continue to use them.
    - 10y ago
krapp 10y ago
So we're just going to pretend that Donald Trump didn't claim the media was manufacturing negative coverage about him, making up quotes or taking quotes out of context and altering poll numbers throughout his entire campaign? Or that Fox News doesn't exist because the American right has been convinced that "fake news" has been a thing for years? Or that fringe sites on both ends of the political spectrum don't actually make up "news" stories as clickbait? Or that various governments don't employ propaganda and disinformation campaigns through various forms of media, including the planting of false stories and rumors, and have been for decades? It's all just something the DNC made up just now? Ok. Or maybe we can concede that the meme of "fake news" is distinct from the actual phenomenon of "fake news"?
- fdsaaf 10y ago
  > Donald Trump didn't claim the media was manufacturing negative coverage about him, making up quotes or taking quotes out of context and altering poll numbers throughout his entire campaign? He did make those claims, and as it turns out, the media really was doing these things --- not only against Trump, but as it turns out, against anyone not-Clinton in the primaries. "Fake news" is psychological projection.
  - krapp 10y ago
    >"Fake news" is psychological projection Yes, in other words, contrary to the premise behind your earlier comment... "Fake news" is itself fake news. Look at the timing: immediately after Clinton lost, a consensus emerged among the losers that we have to do something about all the "fake news" floating around the internet. The timing is a huge DNC banner in the sky. ..."fake news" was not concocted whole cloth by the DNC and leftists in order to discredit Trump's campaign. Because Trump himself invoked it, because it's been a reliable Republican hobbyhorse for years, and because it demonstrably exists. The psychological projection is on the part of Trump supporters, who want people to believe that either fake news doesn't exist, or it does, but it's entirely manufactured by the left.
    - bigtex 10y ago
hashmal 10y ago
so, if you are wary of the left, and see them talk about fake news after an election, you assume they are wrong because it aligns with their interests. this is exactly what the OP and the article author are denouncing.
- pessimizer 10y ago
  And exactly what you're doing. You're ascribing a psychological motivation for the comment that you're replying to that aligns with your own prejudices, rather then replying to its content. There's nothing in the comment you replied to that implies that they are not on the left themselves.
JacobJans 10y ago
You don't seem to be aware of the actual fake news that was spread very widely during the election. For example, an article claiming the Pope endorsed Donald Trump was shared millions of times on Facebook. This is objectively false. Literally fake. The problem of fake news is not about independent news sources, it is about active deception.

by fdsaaf 10y ago

cloakandswagger 10y ago

It's really a last ditch effort for the MSM to remain relevant by appointing themselves as the only source of "real" news. The election was hugely damaging to them, as most outlets predicted a Clinton victory with certainty, and their bias was on full display (see: the Clinton campaign giving direct orders to some journalists). The surge in "fake news" hysteria is simply a way to discredit any independent news source.

JacobJans 10y ago
You don't seem to be aware of the actual fake news that was spread very widely during the election. For example, an article claiming the Pope endorsed Donald Trump was shared millions of times on Facebook. This is objectively false. Literally fake. The problem of fake news is not about independent news sources, it is about active deception.
- PretzelFisch 10y ago
  At this point, it's become partisan. Some how bias and opinion/click bait head lines are now fake news. Someone has moved the argument, And it has been an amazingly effective tactic.

michaelchisari 10y ago

Regardless of the election, the fact that stories like: "Obama Signs Executive Order Banning The Pledge Of Allegience In Schools Nationwide" This got 2,177,000 shares on Facebook. These are the issue. I'm of the mind that Hillary Clinton lost because she was a lackluster candidate who didn't address blue collar issues properly, thinking that anti-poverty and welfare programs would be equivalent. But just because the Democrats are sounding the alarm for reasons you find partisan, doesn't mean the problem goes away. Fake news is the social web's version of fwd: fwd: fwd:, and we've always known that was hugely problematic. Well, now it's gone viral on a global scale. We can't ignore that.

specialist 10y ago
"...Hillary Clinton lost because she was a lackluster candidate who didn't address blue collar issues properly, thinking that anti-poverty and welfare programs would be equivalent." This is mostly correct. HRC didn't win enough. Democratic candidates have to also overcome structural flaws in our system. HRC didn't inspire like Obama and Bernie did. IMHO, her biggest mistake was getting into the gutter with Trump with all the negative attacks. Obama didn't do that. Voters are sick of it, so those Obama voters simply stayed home. But she's a Clinton. The War Room & triangulation strategies that worked so well before failed her in 2008 primary and 2016 general. Too bad she didn't learn from Obama's campaign successes.
- ktRolster 10y ago
  all the negative attacks. Obama didn't do that. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/07/23/obama-wins-attack-ad-battle-online/ http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/07/23/obama-wins-attack-a... "Did Obama run the most negative ads in us history?" (Probably not, but he ran a lot of them. The article goes into detail on numbers) https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-obama-run-the-most-negative-ads-in-us-history/2012/02/01/gIQAYUkriQ_blog.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-o... The reality is, negative ads work, so politicians will continue to use them.
  - 10y ago

krapp 10y ago

So we're just going to pretend that Donald Trump didn't claim the media was manufacturing negative coverage about him, making up quotes or taking quotes out of context and altering poll numbers throughout his entire campaign? Or that Fox News doesn't exist because the American right has been convinced that "fake news" has been a thing for years? Or that fringe sites on both ends of the political spectrum don't actually make up "news" stories as clickbait? Or that various governments don't employ propaganda and disinformation campaigns through various forms of media, including the planting of false stories and rumors, and have been for decades? It's all just something the DNC made up just now? Ok. Or maybe we can concede that the meme of "fake news" is distinct from the actual phenomenon of "fake news"?

fdsaaf 10y ago
> Donald Trump didn't claim the media was manufacturing negative coverage about him, making up quotes or taking quotes out of context and altering poll numbers throughout his entire campaign? He did make those claims, and as it turns out, the media really was doing these things --- not only against Trump, but as it turns out, against anyone not-Clinton in the primaries. "Fake news" is psychological projection.
- krapp 10y ago
  >"Fake news" is psychological projection Yes, in other words, contrary to the premise behind your earlier comment... "Fake news" is itself fake news. Look at the timing: immediately after Clinton lost, a consensus emerged among the losers that we have to do something about all the "fake news" floating around the internet. The timing is a huge DNC banner in the sky. ..."fake news" was not concocted whole cloth by the DNC and leftists in order to discredit Trump's campaign. Because Trump himself invoked it, because it's been a reliable Republican hobbyhorse for years, and because it demonstrably exists. The psychological projection is on the part of Trump supporters, who want people to believe that either fake news doesn't exist, or it does, but it's entirely manufactured by the left.
  - bigtex 10y ago

hashmal 10y ago

so, if you are wary of the left, and see them talk about fake news after an election, you assume they are wrong because it aligns with their interests. this is exactly what the OP and the article author are denouncing.

pessimizer 10y ago
And exactly what you're doing. You're ascribing a psychological motivation for the comment that you're replying to that aligns with your own prejudices, rather then replying to its content. There's nothing in the comment you replied to that implies that they are not on the left themselves.

JacobJans 10y ago

You don't seem to be aware of the actual fake news that was spread very widely during the election. For example, an article claiming the Pope endorsed Donald Trump was shared millions of times on Facebook. This is objectively false. Literally fake. The problem of fake news is not about independent news sources, it is about active deception.