Post-Buzzfeed, media does a 180 on "Fake News", say it's a dangerous term which can silence people

[Pwent]

ive been talking about this a lot lately, it happened before the buzzfeed thing

it was a good tool for like 2 days, where they can group any dissenting opinion with "OBAMA REVEALED REPTILIAN ALIEN" clickbait before it immediately got turned on them

thats why you cant have censorship. lies can be disproven and dismissed. but theres no remedy for censored truths. id rather have 100 lies published than 1 truth censored

 

[Pwent]

>Looks like the same problem that I have with the liberals' and leftists' mentality when it comes to a lot of topics: The believe that government should do something under the assumption that the 'right' guys are in charge and that it's done 'the right way' (agreeing with them), then they panic when somebody else would be in charge of similar actions.

I think this is a very good point, which I feel passionate about. the founding fathers put a shitload of checks and balances in for a reason, and wanted the government to be weak so that no person or group could become too powerful.

even if you think a current president or government would never abuse his power, if you create channels for power and remove checks and balances, theres no stopping someone like hitler or mao from being elected next and being tyrannical

makes me further appreciate george washington for not wanting to be a king and wanted to give himself very little power as president

but nah, now the founding fathers are referred to by progressives as "rich white slave owners" whos ideals should be dismissed despite creating the most prosperous nation in the history of mankind

 

[Pwent]

It is, specifically because you tools started calling credible publications fake news rather than making a fair case. It's a great tactic. Now the investigation stops at fake news, and the heard can just block out information without any subtlety.

those publications actually publish a shitload of fake news though. thats why the term was so absurd and used mockingly

 

[Pwent]

fake news began as a legitimate description for totally made up shit like:

obama's infamous "holiday trees" that made the rounds on social media. total bs, and shit like this undoubtedly impacts elections.

but then we just have bad news.....not fake news.....there is a difference. cnn, fox, and msnbc are all bad news. its legitimate news that is spun by pundits and opinion, but its based in some fact. kinda like movies that say "inspired by a true story" rather than saying its a "true story."

no, they post a bunch of outright fake news too. like "hands up, dont shoot" or the trump dossier

 

[NewGuardBjj]

those publications actually publish a shitload of fake news though. thats why the term was so absurd and used mockingly

There's a distinction between fake news and bad news. The line can become very thin at times, but for the most part, it's pretty clear.

I agree that CNN is out for Trump and that their standards have dropped.

 

[Pwent]

Information falls on a spectrum of credibility. There's no hard and fast threshold. But CNN is well within the boundaries of credibility. (Spare me all y'all's infuriated responses to this bit, okay?)

But I'm not sure what you're getting at, though, because I don't support "throwing legislation" at fake news. That was never a position I showed support for in any of my posts on this forum.

Rather, I'd like dickheads like Trump to stop calling CNN and other publications fake news and instead start making reasonable critiques (which would be more effective). In Trump's case, though, that isn't possible. He called CNN fake news for reporting on a dossier that was bound to dominate headlines across the board. He's not making a reasonable critique and never intended to. He's using the term "fake news" to bully the press and silence voices that are critical of him. You see the problem here?

I'm not going to defend CNN against the incoming shitstorm because their lapses of judgement aren't relative to the point I'm making.

he called them fake news, because they literally just published a fake news story about him and called it a CNN exclusive

youre going to give them a pass because you think other outlets would publish the same fake news story??? what the fuck

so if another media source is going to publish "obama is a lizard person who eats babies", it becomes ok to publish it?

i cant even empathize with your thought process here. normally i can disagree with someone while still understanding why they think what theyre saying, but this is off the deepend for me

 

[Pwent]

There's a distinction between fake news and bad news. The line can become very thin at times, but for the most part, it's pretty clear.

I agree that CNN is out for Trump and that their standards have dropped.

they do both bad news and fake news

"hands up dont shoot", lying about hillarys health and trumps dossier are some recent ones

 

[m52nickerson]

Ok , since we can assume this would be rolled out sometime after friday , who would you like to see President Trump appoint to head this thing up?

No one. This is not something the government needs to be involved in.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

no, they post a bunch of outright fake news too. like "hands up, dont shoot" or the trump dossier

we really dont know shit about the trump dossier, which is why even cnn described it as "unsubstantiated."

 

[Liquid Smoke]

I'm so sick of this fake news stuff. Like some article on the front of Sherdog about BJ Penn losing to some Tuffer I never heard of.

 

[Pwent]

we really dont know shit about the trump dossier, which is why even cnn described it as "unsubstantiated."

it was proven false on every level. like accusing people of going to countries theyve never been to and have legit alibis for

 

[JonnyRingo84]

it was proven false on every level. like accusing people of going to countries theyve never been to and have legit alibis for

no it hasnt been. there is little reason to believe that trump wasnt peed on, but you dont KNOW that it didnt happen either. no doubt, the cnn spin doctors present all of this info, and the blm movement in a partisan way to the point where the info nearly isnt true anymore, as does fox. it is based in some reality though, which is why its so believable to some.

stories like the obama "holiday trees" are 100% bs. they are based on nothing. literally pulled out of thin air. fake news vs bad news.

 

[EGarrett]

A lot of less knowledgeable people are figuring out now for the first time that any excuse you make to use force on someone, like "fake news" or "the government knows what's best," can be turned on you in a heartbeat, by someone who terrifies you. And that the real problem is intitiating force by itself.