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.

 

CNN slings accusations of "Fake News" but it turns out to be "Fake News".

page: 2
34
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Trump did say the cost would be 4 billion. It is on his twitter page. The story quoted Boeing and the Air Force. The number is not yet known. Trump states also, for only 1 plane.


Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!


Trump Twitter


edit on 7-12-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: reldra

Total knee-jerk reaction on your part.



Umm, no. I am looking at it logically. The news was not fake. The addition of The Gateway Pundit to the list of sites that made the fake news was an error.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: omniEther

The thread is a FAKE title. Ironic.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: xuenchen
CNN's "retractions" are an old trick.

They get their message printed, wait a while, then "retract" when nobody is reading it anymore.

Old trick.



The story was REAL though, they added one news outlet to the list that didn't fabricate the quote, but others did.
It is not fake news, it was one entry in a list that was incorrect.

Does no one know the difference between real and fake news?


Yes, fake news is really fake news. CNN goes one step above and writes news with factual information yet either omits important facts because of a narrative or outright lies.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: xuenchen
CNN's "retractions" are an old trick.

They get their message printed, wait a while, then "retract" when nobody is reading it anymore.

Old trick.



The story was REAL though, they added one news outlet to the list that didn't fabricate the quote, but others did.
It is not fake news, it was one entry in a list that was incorrect.

Does no one know the difference between real and fake news?


Yes, fake news is really fake news. CNN goes one step above and writes news with factual information yet either omits important facts because of a narrative or outright lies.


No, the article was correct. One news site was incorrectly in a list and they retracted. How is that 'above and beyond fake news'?



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: omniEther

A retraction is the ethical thing to do. This not an example of fake news, only poor journalism.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

So basically,in your opinion "Fake News" websites can publish any baseless article they want as long as they retract their bogus claims a month later when nobody cares about it anymore



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: xuenchen
CNN's "retractions" are an old trick.

They get their message printed, wait a while, then "retract" when nobody is reading it anymore.

Old trick.



The story was REAL though, they added one news outlet to the list that didn't fabricate the quote, but others did.
It is not fake news, it was one entry in a list that was incorrect.

Does no one know the difference between real and fake news?


Yes, fake news is really fake news. CNN goes one step above and writes news with factual information yet either omits important facts because of a narrative or outright lies.


No, the article was correct. One news site was incorrectly in a list and they retracted. How is that 'above and beyond fake news'?


No, it was partially correct until retracted. It is better than fake news but not as good as factually correct unbiased reporting.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
CNN's "retractions" are an old trick.

They get their message printed, wait a while, then "retract" when nobody is reading it anymore.

Old trick.



While the sources you quote never post any retractions, they pretty much don't care if they are proved false. Your storyline is getting really old.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   
When I hear the term "fake news", CNN automatically pops in my ..

This is coming from a former long time CNN reader.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: DrStevenBrule
When I hear the term "fake news", CNN automatically pops in my ..

This is coming from a former long time CNN reader.


CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ABC, BBC, dailymail, guardian, huff post, you can find any slant you want, but read them all, they will piece together the real story. Local news is a good source as well.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: omniEther

A retraction is the ethical thing to do. This not an example of fake news, only poor journalism.


That's actually true in this case.

My eyes will be staying sharper than ever now that they opened the fake news can of worms.

Any over step they make in that direction will make them look more fake to the masses, so they better start treading much more carefully.

start pointing at too many true news stories as fake, and you are going to look worse than the boy who cried wolf.. It would be as if the boy who cried wolf became a wolf and then the villagers said oh there is a wolf and killed it..


edit on 7-12-2016 by Reverbs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Well it was certainly carelessness on the part of the writer of the CNN article.

Everything that was said of Truthfeed/Amy Moreno (@VivaLaAmes) is pretty spot on. If you're unfamiliar with her work, she's one of the top Twitter trolls for Trump (and as with a few others, coordinated with the campaign) and of course, she regularly posts/reposts completely made up s#, like this quote that didn't come from the Pepsi CEO.

Jim Hoft (TGP) however did not falsely quote the Pepsi CEO though he jumped on the boycott bandwagon and he did falsely claim that their stock price dropped nearly 5%:


Now this…
The Pepsico stock dropped nearly 5% since Indri attacked president-elect Trump.
From 106.89 to 101.72


That's is not true (as in factually incorrect). The comments he calls an "attack" were made 11/10. The stock on 11/10 was at 103.25, not 106.89. (FYI: It was 103.19 on 11/11, 101.39 Monday 11/14 and today it closed at 102.81 — another successful boycott obviously!) So it was factually incorrect. I can't say whether his error was intentional or not but in either case, it was used as evidence of something that didn't actually happen. Maybe he'll be inspired to issue a correction?

I will say this, as far as bulls# sources go, these two at least put their names to it. Hoft's been around for years, so he does have a reputation and he could be held accountable by his readers for the garbage he often posts, including straight up hoaxes.

Now back to CNN.

The writer flubbed it. That's shoddy journalism on the part of the author of the story for sure but fake news? Hoft called CNN out and they corrected the story and apologized. That's how it should work. It's also exactly the sort of thing that separates news from fake news.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I love the semantic games being played to save face.

Whether you want to call it "fake news" or "poor journalism", it's bulls# either way.

How about that? Let's just call it "bulls#" so people can't hide behind linguistic technicalities.




posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

"Truthfeed and The Conservative Treehouse and more fake right wing blogs"


WTF... how can a blog be fake? You do know a blog is someones personal opinions.


Geeze Louise... get a grip already.


Fake blogs....lol made my day and it is early yet.


Any journalist that has a blog that is separate from their employment is purely personal opinion.

If Wolf Blitzer had a blog called the "Wolf Report" and it was a separate entity from CNN... it would be Wolf's personal opinion on things,,, not a CNN official position.


edit on R512016-12-11T09:51:55-06:00k5112Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Trump did say the cost would be 4 billion. It is on his twitter page. The story quoted Boeing and the Air Force. The number is not yet known. Trump states also, for only 1 plane.


Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!


Trump Twitter

Actually trump was right about that.
edit on 11-12-2016 by omniEther because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 11:53 AM
link   
If Trump votes in Cali counted towards Total then Californians would come out to vote and get those extra millions of votes for Trump.
Jail Hillary it is time



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:35 AM
link   
CNN is in so much hot water, that it's putting together a 2-hour special to show how important it has been to the world. Might take a few years for them to find 2 hours worth of REAL news clips in their archives though.
edit on 2/19/2017 by carewemust because: typo



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: omniEther

removed..

edit on 19-2-2017 by purplemer because: #itstime




top topics



 
34
<< 1   >>

log in

join