Fake News Just For Right-Wingers: A Huge Industry

a reply to: Shamrock6

Lol, I apologise.

Night.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Add a few unfounded insults and you would have the complete argument!

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

A valid, genuine website will have a real "About Us" or "About" item in their menu.
ALWAYS click it when you are doing research. No legit news outlet will have a 404 on the About menu tab, or not have one at all. Check the "Contact" tab or link, too.

VERIFY that the source is an actual news outlet. Look for provable addresses, actual names, etc.

I catch a lot of fake news this way actually. There was once a time on ATS when members would track down sources to the things they posted. Not so much anymore. I can think of a couple members who will post absolute crap stories from the worst sources possible and never admit to it even when called out on it.

I've killed my fair share of bunk stories here simply by sourcing it back to the original source and showing how from that one fake source how many sites just simply ran with the story because it fit their narrative. Those threads typically slide off the list fairly quickly after a few insulting comments are thrown my way of course. They don't seem to enjoy being caught in their pushing of propaganda too much. Yet, sure enough they'll always return pushing something else in the same way again sooner or later.

That's what separates the real problems from the mistakes too. Nobody with integrity likes to be responsible for pushing propaganda but it happens now and then because people make mistakes. It sucks being called out for it too but those people aren't the problem. They just made a mistake and it happens to all everyone at some point. The real problem are the people who either know it's BS and still keep pushing it or just don't care. They are the ones that need to be thrown out of here. They are the ones who spread lies knowing they're lies or just don't care about what the truth is. All they do is push an agenda at all costs. Mistakes happen to the best of us but those who care try and correct for those mistakes in the future. There are some however who never correct their ways.

a reply to: mOjOm

If you'd just calm down a little and actually read what is being said instead of knee jerking through it all you'd realize this.

The words intellectual elites get bandied around a lot lately - and for a reason

Anti-intellectualism revolves around this idea that some people are saying some other people are stupid - and that they feel insulted by this. It depends on some people saying that their facts are as good as anyone's

Past this, there's nothing you can say about any of it because it all closes down as soon as you suggest that some of the things that have been floating around out there are completely fake - and with a target in mind

You''re right to ask for calm, but what I get out of all of this is we can't even have this discussion because some people are certain that this is about intelligence, and insulting people's intelligence - and not confirmation bias (which actually might be more of a cultural thing in most instances)

We're at this weird point now where I have to have this conversation with you - and not anyone else in this thread

Of course - everything I just said was insulting to someone. Even though it wasn't

a reply to: seagull

So NPR doesn't have an editorial slant? Totally honest are they?

For every right "fake news" there's a matching left "fake news".

She's not talking about bias. Not even a little bit

This is actually about people creating fake news

Like The Onion - only not funny

a reply to: desert

I admire a lot of the sincerity of many of our new conservatives. As our understanding of the techniques of mind control, of the ways in which we are kept as chattel by the establishment come to light, the indignation of all of us is increasing.

For me, one of the biggest things to overcome is that most of us do not want to admit that all these tricks, these brainwashing techniques are worked on ALL of US, right and left alike. The idea that 'all of you are brainwashed' but that kind of thing does' not work on me is one of the most ignorant positions a person can assume. This 'self-blind' partisanship, of placing all the blame on the other side is pumped into the rightwing echo chamber by the very media they assume to be more truthful than the 'leftwing media'. This, we can only hope some of the more mature, some of the more insightful conservatives among us can come to understand this and help break the hold of the 'insincere media' that panders to, not so much ignorance, but rather the still politically immature among us.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

A valid, genuine website will have a real "About Us" or "About" item in their menu.
ALWAYS click it when you are doing research. No legit news outlet will have a 404 on the About menu tab, or not have one at all. Check the "Contact" tab or link, too.

VERIFY that the source is an actual news outlet. Look for provable addresses, actual names, etc.

I catch a lot of fake news this way actually. There was once a time on ATS when members would track down sources to the things they posted. Not so much anymore. I can think of a couple members who will post absolute crap stories from the worst sources possible and never admit to it even when called out on it.

I read the About. Google the news site. Google the story to see if it shows up on other sites. Pull key words and Google those. Research the author of each article. (most legitimate news sites now have a wikipedia page that gives their history, etc).

I also kill the volume on any news sites. I only read them. You can be really swayed by a soothing voice (ever read Trump in transcript?)

After all that, I still do a "wait and see".

Then I come to ATS to see what's being said (or the reverse).

Wait, you actually took a class to spot b.s?

Lol, what a waste of time.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Even worse is that simply "Intellectuals" has become a sort of slur lately as well I've noticed. Adding the elites in with it makes it even more repulsive it seems as it adds an extra bit of "You're not welcome here" kind of attitude. To some degree I understand the distaste for the term as it makes one think of a snobby know it all looking down at others and laughing with a superior kind of attitude. But it's gone past that and I've seen it used to actually insult those who are "Educated". As if somehow education makes people less intelligent as a standard rule. It reminds me of a Bill Hicks joke about people in a Diner saying, "Looks like we got ourselves a reader!" because he was reading a book. Not the kind of thing that should be looked down upon generally speaking, ya know??

What I see here a lot are people reading much more into what is being said though sometimes. Worse is that it's never verified first before insinuating it as true. It's one thing to read more into something published that is being discussed. You can't ask the author what they really mean. But when it's one member vs. another member you can just ask for more information about what they're trying to imply or say. More than once I've had to try and explain to someone here that they're putting words in my mouth and what they describe is not what I have said. But sometimes they refuse to accept that. As if they know better than you do what you were actually saying. Mountains get made from Mole Hills.

I think you're right that this topic is about Confirmation Bias much more than Intelligence though. Or perhaps the meaning of what an Echo Chamber is and how it works. That's the problem as you point out. People feel they are being insulted when it's not about them. Unless of course they feel it is about them then I guess it is, but they've made that happen themselves actually. It's hard to explain that it's not personal once they've taken it as such.

originally posted by: Annee

I also kill the volume on any news sites. I only read them. You can be really swayed by a soothing voice (ever read Trump in transcript?)

That's funny you should mention that because I have. I was blown away when I did. I kept thinking to myself. Is that really what was said???

Because just listening to it you miss just how random and broken the thought process is in some of what is being said. Only when you read it written out do you notice it. It's actually funnier and more crazy to read it than just listen to it and it's already pretty funny just to hear it most of the time.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Annee

I also kill the volume on any news sites. I only read them. You can be really swayed by a soothing voice (ever read Trump in transcript?)

That's funny you should mention that because I have. I was blown away when I did. I kept thinking to myself. Is that really what was said???

Because just listening to it you miss just how random and broken the thought process is in some of what is being said. Only when you read it written out do you notice it. It's actually funnier and more crazy to read it than just listen to it and it's already pretty funny just to hear it most of the time.

Oh, absolutely!!!!!!

Trump in transcript is really quite shocking.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I have just 2 words for you...

Hands Up

That is all... good night.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

The fact here is that fake news is rampant on both sides.

I'm not sure what is worse though, the amount of people that fall for it, or that many think only one side (in this instance, political side) are susceptible to falling for it.

Been trying to point this out for years, and been called every name under the sun for doing so for years.

When you only seek out one side of a story you will of course fall for fake news, and most don't even care, because as long as it parrots their own beliefs, it doesn't matter...

It happens time and time again, a few years ago there was a fake new story that claimed conspiracy theorists were smarter than the avwrage person. There multiple threads on it, lot's of congratulating backslaps and "I told you so" comments. No one thought to fact ceck it though, because it was all a lie.

Another example, a recent thread about a study conducted on school students and how they fell for a fake story about a deformed daisy from Fukushima. Most were scoffing and commenting on how it's a reflection of the current schooling system.... I had to point out that people on ATS fell for the same thing not long ago...

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

...and fake news doesn't have a bias attached? Really, then what's the point of it, might I ask.

A bias isn't necessarily a political one, though in this case it most certainly pertains.

a reply to: mOjOm

People feel they are being insulted when it's not about them.

I would think, particularly in a discussion about FAKE news, the OP would have linked out to the original source rather than a secondary. The original source, NPR, used the following title for their article:

We Tracked Down A Fake-News Creator In The Suburbs. Here's What We Learned

So why did the OP instead link to a lessor known/less authoritative site that's carrying the story second hand? Let's look at the article title on the secondary:

Fake news network 'tried to write fake news for liberals — but they just never take the bait.'

Is that the best article headline to lead with, in what according to the OP, is suppose to be a well meant and persuasive bit of writing aimed at saving members of a conservative/right leaning bent from those lying purveyors of FAKE NEWS?

Also consider, why choose to make that headline front and center when it turns out to be, not only the words of a self confessed liar, a man that makes a living by lying, but also the words of a man that admits that he enjoys making conservatives look stupid by . . . wait for it . . . lying. Given the source, and what the op would have us believe her motivations in writing this up were, why give such prominence to these words?

Take a look at the headline of the thread, "Fake News Just For Right Wingers". Again with the "I'm smarter than you tone". A statement arrived at based on the words of a confessed liar, professional con man and left wing propagandist. (So much for critical thinking.)

So yeah back to your quote:

People feel they are being insulted when it's not about them

But right from the get go here, this op was about insulting conservatives, it was about confirming the op's unfounded and self negated bias that progressives are more educated, intelligent, logical and the like than conservatives. The choices she made in in the source she linked to, the prominence she gave the words "'tried to write fake news for liberals — but they just never take the bait" and their implications, and the title of the op, "Fake News Just For Right Wingers" all argue against this being a sincere and well meant attempt at persuasion. Had her intentions been other than insulting conservatives, signaling her own tribal affiliation or confirming her own bias she would have made different choices in how she presented in the op.

So yeah, people that felt insulted by the op, just followed the leads the op provided.

Even worse is that simply "Intellectuals" has become a sort of slur lately as well I've noticed. Adding the elites in with it makes it even more repulsive it seems as it adds an extra bit of "You're not welcome here" kind of attitude. To some degree I understand the distaste for the term as it makes one think of a snobby know it all looking down at others and laughing with a superior kind of attitude. But it's gone past that and I've seen it used to actually insult those who are "Educated". As if somehow education makes people less intelligent as a standard rule.

I think what's distasteful and being called out is the pretense to intelligence, the pretense to objectivity, logic and so on. People want to see a display of intelligence, logic, objectivity, and the like, rather than un-evidenced claims to such. If you're educated, if you're intelligent, if you're logical, fair, objective and the like, you shouldn't have to tell me, it should be apparent in what you say, how you say it and so on. If you need to tell me you're any of those things, its probably because you know it's not being evidenced in your behavior/arguments and so on. Don't tell me . . . show me.

Meh

a reply to: seagull

...and fake news doesn't have a bias attached? Really, then what's the point of it, might I ask.

A bias isn't necessarily a political one, though in this case it most certainly pertains.

What's the point? it's a really great question. I wish we could actually talk about that, but I'm not going to even touch it

You're looking for a bias - and fake news is obviously created for an intended audience

My point is only that you can't pull out examples like Breitbart or NPR for this - it doesn't work

They are biased - clearly. But, they aren't fake. The news that comes out of either of them might be spun one way or another - but the basis of the story is actual, verifiable news. Fake news means the story has no point of origin - there is nothing about it that is real

If I make up a story that's fairly well written about three Romanians blowing up a pub in Germany and put it out on the internet using a quasi-professional format, and it then makes it to your Facebook feed (or whereever) it's not biased - it's just fake. It's not a real story

This is what we're talking about - and not just in this thread. It's everywhere. This is a huge story, and for a good reason. The results have been predictable - one side absorbs and reacts predictably to the story (or stories) while the other side reacts predictably to that reaction - and so it goes

We've been played. It's time to put away all our hurt feelings and fragile egos and realize what we're looking at here. It affects all of us

a reply to: mOjOm

Good post -

Even worse is that simply "Intellectuals" has become a sort of slur lately as well I've noticed. Adding the elites in with it makes it even more repulsive it seems as it adds an extra bit of "You're not welcome here" kind of attitude.

It is a slur - and it's on purpose

It's a pretty big target - kinda makes you wonder what the point of it is :-)

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

If I make up a story that's fairly well written about three Romanians blowing up a pub in Germany and put it out on the internet using a quasi-professional format, and it then makes it to your Facebook feed (or whereever) it's not biased - it's just fake. It's not a real story

I understand the distinction you're making. But limiting it to stories written as "click bait" for example, I have to ask, what was the real impact? Can we quantify it's significance? This could be a tempest in a teapot.

Google probably has some interesting data that might shed some light on the matter, as well as motivation to marginalize these sites if they're not serving their advertisers well. The steps that Google takes in the next several months might be interesting to watch.