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.

 

So I Started Building A 'Fake News' List

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

The list is protected speech! *snort*

Don't worry, anyone that values free speech and the exchange of ideas & information will still have the gumption to decide for himself/herself what exactly constitutes 'fake news.'





posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

It's scary when people start categorizing free speech.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: theantediluvian

That's good work. These sites should be exposed for peddling nonsense and click baiting. Your list is a good reference in that regard.


I think we'd all rather that the public work it out for themselves instead of whining to corporations or worse, demanding that governments "do something." I know I would.


I never thought otherwise. There is little to worry about in terms of government censorship. In fact, nowadays the government defends free speech (at least in the US) better than any other entity as far as I can tell. But it is still pernicious when vast social media corporations engage in censorship, though it is their right to do so.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Yeah...then they move on to categorizing free speakers.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Great post and research. I have been curious of this.

1, with ABC news it talks about fake news click baits that are viruses and maleware. While reading(ABC site) I got the maleware pop-up, lucky winner! and currently working on removing the maleware. Just heads up guys. I don't get these usually and try to run top of the line security after 2 attacks on my bank. (Don't worry it was only total $23. I'm pay check to pay check person)

2, about Hillary claiming wants to see Trump run democratic president? How exactly is this fake news? 2013 is good bit of time and it's known fact Trump use to be friends with Clintons, Trump considered running 2012, on few occasions mentioned running Democrat. I think there's more recent news claim "Trump turns his back to Democratic Party". He is filthy rich and can't be bought.. that's pretty true and was big part in his campaign. I've also seen MSM, Times or maybe Washington Post about next four years of America (under Trump) and talks about how he's closest thing to "Independent Party" we've had in modern world. From YouTube's where I've heard mail leaks. Not that YouTube's wrong but when see it through their screen its hard not to believe.

3, Did nothing come up for Breitbart?

4, True Pundit one not sure on either as it's sourced and don't seem far fetched. Honestly wouldn't doubt it for her bad health, maybe not shadow coax but keeping her on track when she has meltdowns or whatever happening to her.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Any list without CNN is laughable.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: TinfoilTP

There shouldn't be any list.

Creating any list that exemplifies any ideology is wrong.

It should be up to the individual to discern whatever information is relevant.




It is pretty annoying when the sheep tell you they are awake while they only changed from meadow to meadow happily bleating "fake news behehe"



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I know it is. It's a real quagmire.

At some point a 'list' may become an actual target to 'chill.' At that point, all bets are off.


edit on 10-12-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: IAMTAT

My whole issue with this is that information will be filtered by people with ideological agendas.

Free speech is dead.


Slander isn't free speech. Regurgitating other stories is hardly reporting, and investigative journalism isn't under attack if it's accurate. John Stewart has pointed out Fox has done this for years, using THEMSELVES are sources for phrases like "people are saying" from other shows on their own network, even for things NO ONE WAS SAYING before they did.

If you think another story is news worthy for your outlet, you should at the least look into it slightly if you're a 'news' outlet. Half these fake news outlets don't even write a new take, just plagiarize the story and some don't even source what they copy.
edit on 10-12-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I never suggested otherwise. I was simply offering data pertaining to the quality of information provided by some sources on the web based on my own light research.

Somehow "denying ignorance" in this case is "scary" and "wrong."



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Well most of your speech is bulls#
Terrified now?



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Yes, I would love to see the OP's list of legitimate news sites.


PBS and NPR on top of the list no doubt.




posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack

It's not up to you or anyone else to categorize speech for anyone else.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: DBCowboy

Well most of your speech is bulls#
Terrified now?


Not at all.

But I see you justifying labels on speech.

"Sanitized for your protection"?



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: imjack

It's not up to you or anyone else to categorize speech for anyone else.


You never lost free speech, there are still consequences for yelling fire. Free speech and the first amendment revolve around censorship, not what is politically correct. How have they been censored? They haven't even been touched yet, this thread is just a list, and you whine about loss of freedom. Additionally, if what they report wasn't fake, and they took a less lax stance on what they publish, SPECIALLY what they copy from other outlets, they wouldn't be on the list.
edit on 10-12-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
Invalid list....


CNN is blatantly missing.

Invalid list as the OP should have listed themselves as #1



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: imjack

I'm not yelling fire.

I'm not labeling or categorizing elements of speech either.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: imjack

I'm not yelling fire.

I'm not labeling or categorizing elements of speech either.



Yelling fire is a metaphor for the outlets, that you care about protecting free speech for. They yelled fire in the movie theater. People are not banned from yelling fire, but it's still illegal if there is no fire.

Unless you somehow feel personally your freedom of speech is being limited by lists.

Why would I be talking about you?
edit on 10-12-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:40 PM
link   
HEY! He's putting his list on a website...so everything on it must be true.
edit on 10-12-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
HEY! He's putting his list on a website...so everything on it must be true.


validate the debunked news stories then



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join