It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Truth About What Constitutes "Fake News" for the Left Which They Want to Ban.

page: 3
52
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

When did we all stop thinking and deciding these things for ourselves?

Let's look at the religion and conspiracy in religion forums here just to start. For some people, they fervently believe in what is discussed there, but for others, that is all fake news. Who gets to arbitrate that stuff? How about prophecies and predictions?

For example, Now the End Begins is a prophecy site that tries to link current events into prophecy. The prophecy stuff is what likely is getting it nailed, but the headlines are often taken directly from mainstream news sources.



This is their above the fold at the moment. The only one of these I haven't seen in another place in some form is the regulation headline.




posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Fake news? I'm sure they'll include CNN on that list. No?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   
The real truth is that most of the sites listed are fake news and most conservatives accept it simply because they always insult liberals, progressives and leftists. Yes, you're that gullible and desperate for confirmation.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

But I'm sure there are NO leftist sites like that whatsoever? You know that leftists accept and desperately want to believe are true because they continually insult conservatives?

What am I saying? We know there are plenty of them.

And I am wondering why MediaMatters isn't on here? It's infamous for quoting people out of context and them creating a narrative around the quote that is out all proportion to reality.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Does anyone honestly believe that we, as a society, need someone to step in and tell us what to like, what to know, what to read?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

" But what exactly does "fake news" means to the left? "

Any News that has an Inkling of Truth in it .



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Apparently, a lot of people in this thread do. They seem to have decided that the reason Trump was elected isn't because Hillary is a corrupt, lying sack of scum but rather that people were free to read too much news that told people she was a corrupt, lying sack of scum. So they want to brand it as "fake" so that the next time they put forth a corrupt, lying sack of scum for election, no one knows the truth before they vote that person in and it's too late.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
Its just all so obvious , President Obama and the United Nations move to transfer critically important jurisdiction over the Internet to an unaccountable UN-aligned monopoly .Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) designed by global “multistakeholder” activists. There conjecture makes them appear even all the more guilty.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DrStevenBrule
a reply to: ElectricUniverse



The left wants to ban all media and speech that doesn't fall in line with their beliefs.



No. You are wrong.


What a profound statement, got anything intelligent to add as rebuttal?

It is blatantly obvious that the media has a progressive libtard bias. If you just examine the amounts of negative or positive info "reporting" time allocated to the two candidates.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: overanocean

Here's a prediction.


Look next year for "news" organizations to get a .news tag on the websites and for any news site that doesn't meet their criteria, get a .com tag.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Of course there are fake leftist news sites. I don't think Media Matters is one of them.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

They don't need to be banned they need to be labeled as tabloid because apparently too many people can't differentiate.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

heh

How dare you take away my right to determine what is relevant and what isn't. How dare you act as moderator in MY life to tell me (based on your ideology) what is and isn't news.



Would you want me to determine where you get your news?

Would you?

Do you want me to control who you read, what sites you visit, what you watch?

Really?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: overanocean

Here's a prediction.


Look next year for "news" organizations to get a .news tag on the websites and for any news site that doesn't meet their criteria, get a .com tag.


There will 2 new designations.

".news.genuine"

".news.tabloid"

These will be certified by a review board headquartered in Switzerland.

You will have access to a complaint form.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake
What happens if a website distributes fake news? They are flagged and a warning message pops up on the screen. That's all. Some people are making false news stories on purpose and publishing them. There needs to be a way to tell how reliable the information you want to get is.

In the end, an alternative website might end up distributing what could be considered fake news simply because they are willing to speculate on stuff. Someone like me likes that aspect and I am willing to go to sites that I believe are genuinely trying to promote their perspective. Warning me that some of the news on there is false is a point well taken, but I'll still go check it out.

Think of it this way: ATS already flags threads that are portraying factually false information. It is the right thing to do. ATS doesn't use this for political gain, however. That is why I disagree with letting a left-wing extremist make the list.


It's both a consumer protection issue and a national security issue in my opinion. I'm pretty sure Trump is going to address this sometime during his 4 years. What we consider the press these days is ridiculous, and what people are able to publish is equally ridiculous. Fake news sites are among the worst because it's essentially enemy propaganda against your citizens.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: DBCowboy

They don't need to be banned they need to be labeled as tabloid because apparently too many people can't differentiate.


Hmm, well that's odd. Just like you don't consider Media Matters to be "fake," I don't consider Breitbart and The Blaze to be "fake." Certainly the headlines on the site above are not "fake" either. Can you deny those are mainstream press stories even if they appear on a site that was labeled "fake"?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:54 PM
link   
A "fake news" story is any story which is verifiably false.

A "fake news" site is any site which makes a substantial portion of their income with "fake news" stories.

It seems to me it ought to be against the law to make a serious attempt to pass a fake story off as a real one. In any case, I wouldn't expect clickbait profiteering to be covered by Freedom of the Press, as it does not serve the public good.

And like it or not, the far right does indeed traffic in fake news.

We're not talking about nuanced deceptions or lies of omission -- we're talking fake stories fabricated from whole cloth that can be verified as such very quickly.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I sure hope not , shouldn't we all strive to be as transparent as obama and the clinton foundation , oh how they loved our principles , like freedom of speech , oh how they rallied about , with such honor.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

It's pretty easy to determine a lie, usually. Opinion isn't really a factor.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:57 PM
link   
It's called personal responsibility, corroborating what is real and what isn't by finding multiple sources. The government has no right nor authority to decide for me what is "fake" and what isn't. Thanks anyways, I have a mind of my own and will make my own decisions.....thanks but no thanks.



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join