This is total BS ATS is on this list.

a reply to: enament

ATS is a reasonable source of information if your brain comes with a natural filter. As long as you can cognitively understand this information was collected by amateurs and is subject to be incorrect you should be fine. That's the whole reason it's policed, and the whole reason it's been called 'fake news'.

The advantage of ATS is that despite being inaccurate MORE often, it does reveal a lower layer of information that perhaps makes true media outlets uncomfortable. Individuals aren't as subject to corporate ties and aren't reading a scripted collaborative as often as a MSM source. That in itself is an invaluable perspective, if it's taken as perspective and not actually factual news.

Absurd to call a non-news site fake news. Is Disney on the list, how about Bloomingdales. Absurd.

a reply to: MacK80

Me and my brother often refer to it as our bull# filter, mine works pretty good i like to think.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson

Lol you left out Home Depo. Since they like to make everyone think any one can do it yourself at home. :-)

a reply to: Subrosabelow
I also found that interesting.

It seems ATS is a bunch of middle-class, educated, white men, and comes with a warning.

Read with an open mind. This news source is untrusted and controversial. These articles are for informational purposes only. Check the facts against multiple trusted news sources.

Did they mean Deny Ignorance?

originally posted by: carewemust
OH.. I see they have Breitbart and InfoWars on the list too..in addition to Above Top Secret.

This tells me that some of the most relevant and accurate REAL NEWS can be found within the media that FakeNewsChecker lists as FAKE.

Take it as a POSITIVE that ATS is listed!

This is how it should work if people have been paying attention at all.

Who is going to consult this list to determine what to believe?

Its not complicated really.

If the establishment begs you to ignore a source, that means it's a threat to them and their rapidly deteriorating command of the people.

a reply to: schuyler

You and I might be misunderstanding each other. The thing is I don't look at ATS is a news site I use it as a site to find the news so i guess you and I do agree on a basic level, but I find there are a lot of highly intelligent people on here that deserve some credit. This place is an outlet to find people with similar interests and share a discussion and debate on issues, we come to conclusions based on evidence presented and usually wind up with a general consensus.

We all who post here are news casters though we spread our ideas and opinions for praise or ridicule, its a great place is it not?

a reply to: enament

Oh come on man, are we all really going to sit here an pretend that certain factions of the ATS membership doesn't promote fake news. Are we really naive to think that a fake news story that appears on ATS doesn't then get picked up and spammed/posted on some other social site? This is a place where fake news comes in but doesn't necessarily get stomped out. All day long I see people railing against the MSM, so where do you think those people are getting their so called facts from? Probably the same place that Trump does.

a reply to: MacK80

I agree with MacK. Much of the time this is the only place I get my news, taking it with a grain of salt, of course. Especially lately as I have started throwing things at my TV when a new channel or program comes on.

Take Fukushima - we had a member in Japan while it was happening, and he kept us up on events faster than the MSM could. Same with the shooting of the cartoonists in France. Of course we have to deal with "breaking news" that are outright HOAXes, such as Obama fleeing the country (LOL).

But, Schuyler has a point too. Free publicity regardless of it being good or bad publicity. We might get an uptick of Trolls for a while, but eventually they leave.

a reply to: WASTYT

The real point is ATS isnt an actual news site its a message board, thats why it doesn't say ATS news we all know how it works here.

a reply to: Lolliek

Thats right , But...ATS isn't a news site though its a source for news, we use our judgement to determine the rest.

I still wonder why and if this site has contacted the site, as they have about being on other "Fake News" lists.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Good for pointing that out, didn't look into the last time I seen the site. Looks like FakeNews gauges that by Alexa. I wonder how Alexa used to compare differently with the shift in members?
Some odd years ago, as one might recall, this site hosted a demographical type questionnaire. That didn't take into context it was one per ISP/household however for couples, for example, using the site-that of course would vary more now that people are using phones and tablets too. The site had around 40 percent women. Sadly can name quite a few women members who have left the site-ether by age and or health related conditions or as it seems just no longer in agreement with the majority.

a reply to: dreamingawake

ATS is more of a combined collective consciousnesses than a news site, agreed

a reply to: WeRpeons

I and many others have brought up such questions before. The general stance is that the moderators want to allow for free speech and let members decide for themselves what is and isn't true. I agree with you about the double standard between UFO and political threads though. I think it's an indication of how ATS has chosen to rebrand itself as a political website rather than a website for other discussions.

a reply to: enament

ATS is more of a combined collective consciousnesses than a news site, agreed

You may be right.
Though that collection of consciousnesses appears to be suffering from a whole list of disorders.

a reply to: enament

It Is a Message Board , but Some Members Do Bring their Fake News Stories Here to be Debunked in Short Order by those Here that See Right Through them . In that Regard , ATS is a News Filter Separating the Wheat from the Chaff sort of Speak . A Worthy Service for the American Public IMO .........

a reply to: enament

Take heart, enament. It's a backhanded badge of honor.
I won't get into my whole story, it's too many times already--
but when your plane (or person) gets shot down by flak; and
the Reich falls anyway, it's good being a dead guy.
Or called crazy... THERE's a process to stay away from.

a reply to: schuyler

Lol, then why do you even bother coming here? So you can spew your bluster? What gives you the vaguest idea that people whose opinions you don't take seriously takes anything YOU say seriously?

I know what you're going to say... why am I even responding to your post then? Fair enough. It's rather simple. Condescension tends to stick out like a sore and puss filled thumb and should be addressed immediately.

a reply to: schuyler

As I recall, the term "fake news" first appeared as an attempt to discredit any discussion about Pizzagate. The usual "crazy conspiracy theorist" label wasn't strong enough anymore. It wasn't enough to just say there was no story, the MSM felt the need to stifle any conversation on the topic.

As to the political credibility of ATS, I don't see why a conspiracy website needs to have any political credibility. I can't think of a single organization on Earth that I would say has political credibility. I find the term to be an oxymoron. If people on ATS want to discuss politics and express their opinions, fine with me. We also have forums on music, sports, TV, movies, etc. No one is saying ATS is a fake music or fake sports site.

And I grant you, there are many conspiracy theories on ATS that I don't subscribe to. Usually, I don't pay much attention to them. I've never felt the need to engage in a long discussion with someone about whether the Earth is flat or whether we went to the Moon or things like that. If some people want to discuss things like that, it's fine with me. I see it like discussing Flatland, it can be intellectually stimulating. I just don't see the harm in it.

One more thing, just because someone is "ill-educated" or "uninformed" doesn't mean they have nothing to contribute to a conversation or topic. Everyone has a unique life experience. For my money, I'd rather listen to a WW2 vet with a 4th grade education than someone with a freshly minted liberal arts degree.

As for the type of ATS threads I'd hang my hat on, here's a superb recent example from IgnoranceIsntBlisss:

DARK ELECTIONEERING How the DNC-MSM-RNC Work Together In Lockstep To Subvert The Nation

I could dig through and find others, but the point is that ATS has a lot of excellent content that more than makes up for things like the Mudpit forum and the zanier conspiracy theories like fake moon landings or honest politicians.

ATS does not warrant a "fake news" label.

First, it is not a news website. It has forums for news and current events, but it also has forums for other things. It's not a fake pets website, or a fake automotive discussion website, or a fake news website. It is a conspiracy theory website. I, for one, do not mind wading through a few bogus theories to find those gems that go from theory to fact.

Second, where you might see "fake" I see people expressing their opinions. I can agree with them, I can disagree with them, I could choose to not even consider anything they say. But it's not really fake unless they don't believe what they are saying. They may be wrong, but who has never been wrong? I used to tell people that there was no way the CIA would be bringing drugs into the US.

I would say that ATS is a very effective conspiracy website. Why, in this very thread, we have debunked the crazy conspiracy theory that ATS is a fake news website.


ETA: Sorry if I got a little redundant, there. Got interrupted by a long phone call and lost my train of thought.

For me, it would depend on their criteria for this list, and how they present it. Unfortunately, they seem to simply be saying "Sites Known For Promoting Extreme Bias And "Alternate Facts"" and then including ATS in a general way on said list. Obviously, ATS "promotes" nothing, but is merely a platform, filled with every opinion imaginable.

There were better ways to include ATS in such a list, by making said list more nuanced and comprehensive rather than - as they even admit - a "catch all" approach.

ATS as an intentional propagator or promoter of misinformation/disinformation/erroneous "news?" No. Totally unfair and inaccurate characterization (ironically making that site a source of "alternative facts" itself.)

ATS as a user driven amalgamation of just about everything, which - not uncommonly - includes misinformation/disinformation/erroneous "news," outright fiction, and at times, meme-driven, viral stories which turn out to be false, but by then have been spread all over the internet, including via ATS (directly or indirectly)? Absolutely. Always has been, probably always will be. Such is the nature of a site like this. Had they said this, or had more gradients for how to characterize the sites on their "list," then it would be a fair statement imo. Alas, they did not.

For me it all comes down to whether they're simply, blatantly tossing things into a list and saying, "Anything on this you shouldn't read or trust, no exceptions!" or just saying, "Here are some alternative news sources you should perhaps treat with massive grains of salt and skepticism because of their very nature." If it's the latter... I agree. If it's the former, not cool.

Sadly, it's the former here. The Fake News list is Fake News.

My two cents.

Peace.