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: 4
52
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: darkbake

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


When news became opinion. All of them report opinion now. Every single one. Fox went to court for the right to lie to people under the guise of entertainment and everyone else followed them. "News" (and I use that term very loosely) websites started popping up claiming to tell the rest of the story. Everything from blogs where people spout opinions to sites like InfoWars which are just propaganda.

The press as a whole has zero integrity these days. We need to tighten up the definitions of press, and start using the laws to silence the people who lie to you while claiming to deliver the truth. That goes equally for Dan Rather (who effectively lost his career for lying) and Alex Jones (who made a career off of lying).

People no longer decide on facts. They decide on opinion, and the opinions they seek out are those that already agree with their views. We don't have a press that creates a well informed public anymore. We have echo chambers that blind people to reality and reinforce their preconceptions.

This has to be fixed.




posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Some people think the Patriot Act will be utilized.

Full censorship by a board of experts.




posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: reldra

Google is talking about banning the ability to advertise on "fake" news sites.


I heard that today. But the mechanism they would use to block advertising escapes me. Google does not own the internet. Maybe the Google executives are delusional, and THINK that they do?

Crooked Hillary started this movement by declaring that after she became President, she would "shut down" the Breitbart website. Source: www.mediaite.com...

America really dodged a bullet by not electing this "nasty woman" as President, didn't we!



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ketsuko

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


Ah, so because "you don't think it is a fake news website" it isn't?...

First of all, and as many posters have already stated it should be each individual that should decide what websites or news stations they should listen to. What the left is doing is targeting alternative websites, more so those that tend to be conservative. This is not only a bias but it is an attempt by the left to suppress certain news sites. The worst thing is that it won't end there when it concerns to the left using these tactics. We have already seen how the Obama administration has also targeted conservative news sites and conservative groups in the past.

FEC Dems lay groundwork to ban Fox, WSJ political coverage


Obama Admin’s Heavy-Handed Approach Causes US Fall in World Press Freedom Index
...The United States disappointingly ranks 46th, having declined three places in 2014. This is due to the Obama administration’s heavy handed approach to certain journalists, including the New York Times’ James Risen, who came under pressure to reveal his sources.
...

www.cnsnews.com...

HuffPo: Obama Policy Toward Press A 'Dictator's Dream'

President Who Goes After Press Promises that Reporters Will Not Be Imprisoned for 'Doing Their Job'

Since that type of attempt by the left were stopped, they started concentrating in alternative media. The thing is, while there might be some topics in alternative media that could be false, CNN/MSNBC/Fox etc are no exception on posting some false information, the truth is that alternative media does post a lot of information that the mainstream media does not, and in many cases later pick up on.

This is nothing but another attempt by the left to bar alternative media they simply don't want people to read.

This is the type of argument, and decision made by dictators, such as Chavez and the castro brothers.


edit on 17-11-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.

edit on 17-11-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add links.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

But the left has done it too, and so have even mainstream sources. They've been caught using photoshopped photos and staged photos in stories and even fake stories.

I will refer you again to Dan Rather and Brian Williams.

One of the organizations that posts "fake" news regularly and routinely publishes pieces from members of congress and another one worked to help produce one of the debates during this election season. Is this something that usually happens for organizations known to be purveyors of "fake" news?



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:09 PM
link   
I'd like to see a lot more "forced" transparency in all sorts of things.

Fake news needs to be labeled as fake.

Dark money in politics needs to be clearly traceable back to the wealthy elite who own our government.

Paid protesters need to be identified as such.

The people paying the protesters (or paying their transport and the like) need to identify themselves publicly.

Anyone on the internet being paid to espouse an opinion needs to be identified as such.

More and more we live in a reality that is manufactured per the specs of the highest bidder. Technology, globalization, consolidation of corporate interests, and the increased consolidation of wealth and power have all conspired to make it easier to manipulate the masses.

We are lied to constantly.

It needs to end.
edit on 17-11-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Now, if they mean Fake news sites like there are fake rolex's, then I'm ok with taking the fakes down.




posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Leftist authoritarians wanting to censor and end free speech and control the flow and type of information.

This is my shocked face.



The left promotes free speech. It is the right that often uses derogatory terms for the left when it is exercised.


You're kidding me right?

For a while there I thought my username was Wingnut... but let me say Libtard and OMG all of a sudden the moderators spring into action.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greggers

But the left has done it too, and so have even mainstream sources. They've been caught using photoshopped photos and staged photos in stories and even fake stories.

I will refer you again to Dan Rather and Brian Williams.

One of the organizations that posts "fake" news regularly and routinely publishes pieces from members of congress and another one worked to help produce one of the debates during this election season. Is this something that usually happens for organizations known to be purveyors of "fake" news?


Whether it's from the right or the left, if it's fake, I advocate labeling it as such. In fact, I'd suggest that anything that manages to bend the "news" laws by operating under the banner of entertainment shouldn't be protected by Freedom of The Press and should be far easier to sue.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

This Website is a Good Source for Finding Out if the News you are reading is coming from a Fake News Site .



fakenewswatch.com...


Some Examples -

CLICKBAIT WEBSITES

Clickbait websites are sites that take bits of true stories but insinuate and make up other details to sew fear. Most of these are conspiratorial in nature are very unreliable. Below are a list of these websites:

BeforeItsNews.com
Infowars.com
DailyBuzzLive.com




FAKE/HOAX NEWS WEBSITES

Fake/Hoax News sites are satire sites that are not funny. They are an attempt to play on gullible people who do not check sources and will just pass the news on as if it were really true. Below is the list of know Fake/Hoax News Websites:

DailyCurrant.com
MSNBC.website
RealNewsRightNow.com
EmpireNews.com



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   
This is easily solvable by ICANN...they could simply give certified news agencies their own canonical extension, like .GOV has for governmental, well, there could be .NWS or some such. This way you know, if you source anything else, youre taking your chances with credibility.

Part of the requisite of attaining that extension could be irrefutable verification, until then, they simply are disallowed from publiching and fined if not adhered to.
edit on 17-11-2016 by alphabetaone because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
First of all, and as many posters have already stated it should be each individual that should decide what websites or news stations they should listen to.


It's up to the consumer to choose which product they use, but with most products there's regulations that prevent the products being made from being harmful. Fake news is harmful, therefore it should be regulated, and some of it like RT should be outright banned as it's nothing but foreign propaganda. If the organization reports the truth there's probably nothing wrong with it but a lot of sites either report outright false news or they report a small amount of news, and then their opinion on that news.

If you're a member of the press you have an obligation to report facts, free of bias. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be reporting. This goes for The Huffington Post as much as it does for Zero Hedge.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:18 PM
link   
*************

Here's the Answers

*************




posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

If we are going to ban websites that might post some false, or misleading information why isn't CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, and the rest of the media included there?... These days all news sources have bias. All news sources are guilty of posting false, or misleading information. If that's a reason to ban news sites, then ALL should be banned/barred.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:20 PM
link   
I think I should determine for everyone else what is news and what isn't.

It won't be a free society, but any society that gets to determine what news the people read/watch isn't a free society.

But apparently, that's okay with many of you.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Well that's the point of education isn't it?

Maybe you missed those lessons in school, but I clearly remember being taught about fact and opinion.

However, just because there is a clear bias in most everything doesn't mean there aren't still facts. The discerning person knows how to separate the two and think about it. What you should be doing is reading a variety of sources to see those facts couched in a variety of ways so that you can see how many different ways they can be thought of and presented. Then you make your own conclusions.

Why do you think I'm here? It's one of the few places that isn't a complete echo chamber.

I may not enjoy reading leftist thought, but I do it. I need to see how exactly the other half of the spectrum thinks about the same issues I am thinking about and why.

And if you think this is a new phenomena, then you haven't made a study of history. The press was mostly always assumed to be this way -- with each little paper or pamphlet having its own admitted angle or viewpoint on the events of the day, and it was that way since the very beginning. The press was never supposed to be a major monolithic entity.

And you never can report just facts without bias.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
First of all, and as many posters have already stated it should be each individual that should decide what websites or news stations they should listen to.


It's up to the consumer to choose which product they use, but with most products there's regulations that prevent the products being made from being harmful. Fake news is harmful, therefore it should be regulated, and some of it like RT should be outright banned as it's nothing but foreign propaganda. If the organization reports the truth there's probably nothing wrong with it but a lot of sites either report outright false news or they report a small amount of news, and then their opinion on that news.

If you're a member of the press you have an obligation to report facts, free of bias. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be reporting. This goes for The Huffington Post as much as it does for Zero Hedge.


That's a pretty tough argument to make when it seems lately, spin is more attractive, fiscally, than actually telling the truth.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


"The Great Firewall of China."

Amnesty International notes that China "has the largest recorded number of imprisoned journalists and cyber-dissidents in the world"[3] and Paris-based Reporters Without Borders stated in 2010 and 2012 that "China is the world's biggest prison for netizens."[4][5]



LOL ..... Well , if Unscrupulous Journalists can b e Imprisoned there , then maybe it's Time to Enact New Laws in Congress
to Keep the Rest of them Honest .
edit on Thu Nov 17 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: added tags.....needs source IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Realistically, had the media not squandered public trust the way it has, the rise of the alternative media would not be so prominent.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 09:33 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join