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.

 

The FAKE, fake news sites.

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Let me preface this thread that I have zero proof, nor computer expertise to verify my suspicions.

Yet, the recent diatribes on 'Fake News' seems to have evolved into an intent to curtail alternate media. For myself, it's more of connecting the dots than anything else.

I recall Rush having issues with calls for boycotts on local advertisers in various cities. He apparently had it investigated and found that there were 10 individuals that with advanced programs, generated massive and fake protests from non-existent posters that would be picked up by larger, so-called legitimate media. ( I believe legal action is ongoing to counter it, but Rush isn't talking about it.)

Then there's the KKK issue at a church where it was massively covered by the MSM and later found to be written by an African-American to make Trump look bad. There have been one or two that I've seen since then at Universities.

I recall is 'news' report, one that is cited as a major example, where it was announced that the Pope had endorsed Trump. (I actually got sucked in by it and shared it. Within minutes, it was debunked as fake and I, also, shared that debunk.

This last one set me thinking that no Trump supporter would be that stupid. I would be too easy to debunk and, further, would demean any worth from that site from that point on.

Is it possible that some idiot Trump supporter would do such a thing? Yes. Here's my thought, it is also possible it was a deliberate move by a left supporter/s to demean the alternate news sites that exposed data the MSM wouldn't air. This would dove-tail with P.R. against Trump AND to degrade the support for alternate news sources.

After all, what better way to defuse the power of a non-controlled news source. (Many news items came from Europe and the U.K. that I never saw on the MSM.)

Is this a likely scenario? I'm not sure. If so, to what degree?

Of course nothing above is proof of anything. I DO feel the thought merits a thread. Shoot it down as you will. I will learn from this.




posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

The internet has made fake news a big problem. However, it has also exposed truth where the MSM has tried to ignore it. I don't know how we're ever going to fix it. I think there are some legitimate news sites like Ben Swann's Truth in Media, but all these sites can easily be corrupted by their corporate sponsors. Ben's site reports the accusations and than proves them false.

With the way the U.S. is split between Liberal's and Conservatives, depending on which party a person is associated with, they tend to accept any news that sheds their party in a positive light. It's another reason why the U.S. should eliminate the party system altogether.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   
The more "fake news" that's out there, the easier it is to bury the truth along with it. You just have to remain vigilant.

With the internet providing a place for it to flourish, at the same time it provides an easy way to debunk or verify.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

It also provides an easy means of drowning in the BS if you don't know what you are doing.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Do not forget, this site was "officially" listed as a fake news site.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fools
a reply to: nwtrucker

Do not forget, this site was "officially" listed as a fake news site.


By whom?



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Fools

Actually it was listed as a Russian propaganda dissemination site, but the owners of ATS contacted the people who made that list and had the site removed.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Indeed, I got the situation confused. Still, this site was on a site considered to be "deplorable" for some time.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Fools

True, but the people who put this site on that list were also kind enough to not only listen to Springer and SO's appeal but also take it into consideration then remove us from that list. Declaring that we were on the list at one time but not what happened afterwards is just part of the story and creates a biased account of what went down. It gives the illusion that we might still be on the list, when we aren't. It also reflects poorly on the list makers when they clearly were open to admitting a mistake when pointed out.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am thinking those people that made the list were actually biased. I am sure they probably sure are.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Fools

That's probably a fair assessment, but you can still give them credit for being open minded enough to take ATS off of their site.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join