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.

 

fake news, or just dishonest reporting?

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

smoke and mirrors.....it is all a show.....




posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
Both good points but the epithet "Fake News" has been co-opted by the left as a tactic to demean any person or group that is brave enough to call out uncomfortable truths. Which is not to say there is no right leaning equivalent.
a reply to: network dude



No. You're are actually just factually wrong with everything you're saying and you're being completely biased as well.

Fake news is literally "False News". As in stories that are totally made up without any truth to them. Basically tabloid creations that aren't true at all. They are created by people who just write them like fiction.

Now, sometimes it's done for entertainment like the Onion and is supposed to be for humor but look very real. Then there are others who are there simply for spreading lies and propaganda and to act as click bait to earn money for the one who created them. That's it.

We aren't talking about news with a bias. Certainly not a bias only to the Left. Media will have a bias depending upon who you're talking about either right or left. But their news is still real. It's just told and analyzed with a bias included. But that isn't what "fake news" is. "Fake news" is literally Fake.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a catch-22, label it fake news and nobody will investigate,report or discuss it, but if it`s not investigated,reported or discussed how can you know if it is fake or real?

I hope this doesn`t become a trend because we have already seen consequences of labeling something as fake news.

If you have something your hiding or trying to cover up just have the media label it as fake news and presto,it will be become forbidden to investigate it, discuss it or even report on it.
politicians have always used this as a way to deflect attention from something they didn`t want people taking a closer look at,but it`s only since this last election that the media has jumped on this bandwagon.

as difficult as it may be to believe a lot of people still trust the media so when the media says something is fake news a lot of people will believe them without looking into it further.
you wanna cover up a sex scandel? have the media label it fake news and the mass of sheeple will have no interest in investigating or discussing it any further.

If people were this easily fooled when Nixon was president he would never have gotten caught,woodward and bernstien would have never begun their investigation.The Washington post would have reported it as fake news and that would have been the end of it.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

The solution seems easy to me. If the news source doesn't conform to its own standards, it is fake news.

The Daily Show and The onion are explicitly fake. In other words, they do not pretend to be real news and live up to their own standards. But a news source that claims certain standards of integrity, yet do not live up to them, are undoubtedly fake. This is why there are ethics in journalism.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   
the real issue at the heart of all this is: who decides what is real or fake?


the Establishment still hasnt learned its lesson. It still wants to set itself up as the authority. This is no different in principle than the divine right of kings. They believe they have the right to dictate to us what is "credible" and "trustworthy" while not performing any of the most basic acts a person must do to WIN that trust.


And by the way.....aside from the laundry list of logical fallacies these dorks are committing, they are effectively telling the entire public that they are not smart enough to figure out whats real on their own without help AND ALSO trampling all over the most basic human right to believe whatever you want to.....and THAT is an affront that cannot be allowed to go unchecked and without serious consequences.

Many like myself consider the MSM the walking dead. They think theyre alive cuz their still on tv sitting there moving their stinky rotten traitorous mouths.....but in reality they have already lost the last bit of credibility they had left.....all of around 6 percent or so last time i checked.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
who was the big shot news caster that was caught fudging stories, and got fired?


Brain Williams.

and watch this, I'll use a "fake news site" to tell you about him.
www.wnd.com...


While on Nightly News on Friday, January 30, 2015, Brian misrepresented events which occurred while he was covering the Iraq War in 2003. It then became clear that on other occasions Brian had done the same while telling that story in other venues. This was wrong and completely inappropriate for someone in Brian’s position. In addition, we have concerns about comments that occurred outside NBC News while Brian was talking about his experiences in the field. As Managing Editor and Anchor of Nightly News, Brian has a responsibility to be truthful and to uphold the high standards of the news division at all times. Read more at www.wnd.com...


while the article is listed on WND, which I lump in with the BS pushers, this particular article seems factual. (although slanted towards calling out Williams for being a douchebag.)



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
This is why there are ethics in journalism.


Um.....there used to be. They seem more elusive than an honest politician.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: network dude

The solution seems easy to me. If the news source doesn't conform to its own standards, it is fake news.

The Daily Show and The onion are explicitly fake. In other words, they do not pretend to be real news and live up to their own standards. But a news source that claims certain standards of integrity, yet do not live up to them, are undoubtedly fake. This is why there are ethics in journalism.


Exactly. We actually agree for a change.

Comedy news like the Daily Show aren't News. They report on the news using a comedic format and it may inform you to some degree, but it's not real news.

What's sad is that even alleged News stations or shows are filled with people who aren't even journalists doing the reporting and investigations. These people are just entertainers and nothing more but you don't know that just by watching it. They look like real journalists and real news anchors or whatever but they aren't. They're just hosts of entertainment media and that is all it is.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

it's not as easy as you seem to make it. Just as my example above. I used a site I and many others consider a "fake"news site, yet the article listed seems to be factual. So the reader still must use their reasoning skills along with the google-fu, to vet what they see and here, no matter the source. (Unless it's one of the fantastic 4 in the mud pit, then you can laugh and poke fun at them with reckless abandon)



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Well maybe it's a bit more than what "You consider" a fake news site. Just because "You" think it's fake news or you don't like what they say doesn't mean it's fake. Hell, it doesn't mean anything.

For starters be careful with Blogs. Blogs are just people like you and me saying stuff. They can post anything without worry. Established news sources have something to lose if they report false news. They can be sued and their businesses can be destroyed, jobs lost, etc. They have an interest in giving you the correct story because if they don't it may cost them dearly. Just some dipsh*t posting from his house can say anything they want.

Fake news places are just Websites that sometimes look credible. Sometimes will even mimic the url of another site. Like NewYorkTimes.net instead of .com or something. You just have to dig into who they are and if they are actually real or not.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
who was the big shot news caster that was caught fudging stories, and got fired?


Brain Williams.

and watch this, I'll use a "fake news site" to tell you about him.
www.wnd.com...


While on Nightly News on Friday, January 30, 2015, Brian misrepresented events which occurred while he was covering the Iraq War in 2003. It then became clear that on other occasions Brian had done the same while telling that story in other venues. This was wrong and completely inappropriate for someone in Brian’s position. In addition, we have concerns about comments that occurred outside NBC News while Brian was talking about his experiences in the field. As Managing Editor and Anchor of Nightly News, Brian has a responsibility to be truthful and to uphold the high standards of the news division at all times. Read more at www.wnd.com...


while the article is listed on WND, which I lump in with the BS pushers, this particular article seems factual. (although slanted towards calling out Williams for being a douchebag.)


Thank you, and who was that older reporter that much respected journalist that was caught forging documents or something, during Obama campaign.?
Sorrry I getting old, brain isn't working



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
who was the big shot news caster that was caught fudging stories, and got fired?


Brain Williams.

and watch this, I'll use a "fake news site" to tell you about him.
www.wnd.com...


While on Nightly News on Friday, January 30, 2015, Brian misrepresented events which occurred while he was covering the Iraq War in 2003. It then became clear that on other occasions Brian had done the same while telling that story in other venues. This was wrong and completely inappropriate for someone in Brian’s position. In addition, we have concerns about comments that occurred outside NBC News while Brian was talking about his experiences in the field. As Managing Editor and Anchor of Nightly News, Brian has a responsibility to be truthful and to uphold the high standards of the news division at all times. Read more at www.wnd.com...


while the article is listed on WND, which I lump in with the BS pushers, this particular article seems factual. (although slanted towards calling out Williams for being a douchebag.)


Thank you, and who was that older reporter that much respected journalist that was caught forging documents or something, during Obama campaign.?
Sorrry I getting old, brain isn't working


Dan Rather.




posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
who was the big shot news caster that was caught fudging stories, and got fired?


Brain Williams.

and watch this, I'll use a "fake news site" to tell you about him.
www.wnd.com...


While on Nightly News on Friday, January 30, 2015, Brian misrepresented events which occurred while he was covering the Iraq War in 2003. It then became clear that on other occasions Brian had done the same while telling that story in other venues. This was wrong and completely inappropriate for someone in Brian’s position. In addition, we have concerns about comments that occurred outside NBC News while Brian was talking about his experiences in the field. As Managing Editor and Anchor of Nightly News, Brian has a responsibility to be truthful and to uphold the high standards of the news division at all times. Read more at www.wnd.com...


while the article is listed on WND, which I lump in with the BS pushers, this particular article seems factual. (although slanted towards calling out Williams for being a douchebag.)


Thank you, and who was that older reporter that much respected journalist that was caught forging documents or something, during Obama campaign.?
Sorrry I getting old, brain isn't working


Dan Rather.




I think so, TY,



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Like so many other things in life, the responsibility for accuracy in media now rests on the consumer.

All any of us can do is not let stories and "media" we don't have time to investigate influence how we think and feel about things.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I really haven't tried to fact-check the stories the enquirer ran with much, as I figured it to be what they themselves claimed it was; a tabloid magazine.
So I don't know if the enquirer was labeled a fake news promoter...are they?

But I do know that a good portion of their stories published have been taken up and ran with by the big media outlets we know and love, ahem.

Baseball field groomers groom the field in such a way that we see a grid-pattern made by the mowers set to cut at certain depths? We just notice how nifty it looks on the surface. We aren't always aware of the mechanics used to grab our attention? I assume that being the case if not a few differing species of grass are employed to give the same depiction?

Some story promoters want us to see and absorb the 'potential' shock value, others want us to be made aware of scandals that run rampant in government?

There are no grey areas between truth and fiction no matter how nifty the picture is to look at?

edit on (12/8/1616 by loveguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
Like so many other things in life, the responsibility for accuracy in media now rests on the consumer.

All any of us can do is not let stories and "media" we don't have time to investigate influence how we think and feel about things.


I agree, but the underlying tone here is that we are being set up for censorship. And call it what you like, but the recent kiddie porn "probing" seems to have set off some serious alarm bells. While the initial claims may not be factual, it seems there is something bad out there and the collective "we" got a bit to close. (Again, IMHO)



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: loveguy


There are no grey areas between truth and fiction no matter how nifty the picture is to look at?


reminds me of a song.


A song that ties right in with our conspiracy lives. Three kids who think they are hardened criminals get mixed up with the Oklahoma City Bombing search and learn a lesson in perspective. The hook is the end of the song explaining the timing and location.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: tribal

That`s easy for me,if it is reported by any of the big MSM outlets then it`s fake news just like all their fake election polls.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: tribal

That`s easy for me,if it is reported by any of the big MSM outlets then it`s fake news just like all their fake election polls.



And you would be 100% factually incorrect in doing so too. Because none of them are what is meant by "fake news". Not Breitbart or Huffpo are considered Fake news either. Because even though they may report with a heavy bias in the news they report on, they don't create complete fiction out of thin air.

But that is what you get when you think everything is as easy as whatever you think it should be.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Dude, I was thinking of taking off and I still am, but I had to address you. In another thread, you just acted like a total punk and told me "go away and tell me" (lol meaning you) "when you have 'experienced something worth talking about.'" Probably felt good, huh? Did it feel good? Is anything you say on this site credible??

Do not lecture me about this having "no reference to the topic," my sentence structure being incomprehensible because I said "dude" or anything else of that nature. You just blew your cred and felt happy doing so.


edit on 8-12-2016 by breakingbs because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join