This is total BS ATS is on this list.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
a reply to: enament

Big Hairy News?

What is interesting is that when I clicked on Checkers link for "Big Hairy News", there was an advertisement for a kids phone from Amazon. This is the same advertisement I was redirected to when I went to Pizzagate.com this morning.

So that site, "Fake News Checker" is actually a fake news site itself. Probably a CNN site. They put ABC News on there just to throw people off.

That site needs to be taken down. Aren't there any good virus makers out there who can stick it to CNN and their ilk?
Come on Nigeria, give CNN a taste of your skills.

Actually its the work of one woman with an agenda, if you scroll through the postings here you should find a link with more information on her.

originally posted by: pyramid head

originally posted by: Elepheagle
I wouldn't feel too hard-pressed to cite this very thread as an example why ATS ended up on that list. Yes, it's a message board, but one that often cites untrustworthy and sometimes purposely false sources bent towards a very specific (and demonstrably hard to find) agenda. Hint: It's not because of CNN.

Longer-term members will likely admit to a shift in the tone and focus of topics on this site over the past few years.

ATS = Assembly of Trump Supporters.

That guy is infallible here, which does not at all square with reality.

Good luck.

It's true, all dissenting opinion should be crushed!! Including those who dare speak on a forum.

All those who question, or dare challenge our ruling pedo-crats are Russian spies and most likely work for Putin.

We can only trust our beloved "news sources" who are owned by 6 corporations(last time I checked, maybe less now). Only they know what's good for us slaves.(end sarcasm)

I can't believe what I'm hearing from a lot of members here. I truly believe the left has become cult/religious in their ideaology.

So true well said, its amazing with just one election how much things have been changed . You are now truly a divided nation now, its a real shame.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Wow that is odd, this world has become so bizar I have to pinch myself to make sure I am not having a nightmare.

a reply to: arcnaver

Its hard to say, I have been wondering why it is no longer a regular feature here.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: PhotonEffect

First of all, we do not disseminate fake news.

The journalism and propaganda that we discuss here, is picked apart, dissected, examined under a black light, by those of us using the site correctly at any rate. The idea is, that if it has merit, stands up under significant scrutiny, then fair enough. If not, then it gets treated like the perverse control mechanism that all false information is.

The information ought to be posted here to be examined, but the thing we sometimes fail on here, and VERY much more regularly since the truth became something that no one wanted to hear anymore, is the actual examination. There can be no examination of a piece of journalism, unless all parties involved with that examination, are prepared to do so without bias, because unless they are, the examination will prove ineffective.

For example:

When the election season was upon us, one of the things that was sadly lacking from both of the eventual candidates to the presidency, was the truth. Hillary lied, and Donald lied. Donald lied, or was in outstanding levels of error, in more than seventy percent of his statements to the public. Yet, some people, falsely, have the impression that he is the most honest President yet, that his administration is the most transparent and so on. Its hogwash, bogus, does not stand up to an examination of the facts. And yet, if you state as much people will suggest that you must be a shill, or must be anti-this, or anti-that. They do not engage with your argument, they do not attempt to disprove the point made, they simply attack, because they cannot reason against the truth. But they can try to bury it.

This mindset is fundamentally incapable due to a lack of will, to cut the lies from the truth and hold only the truth in hand. If an individual would rather cling fiercely to a lie, because it is more comfortable to them than the truth, then no reasonable, rational, logical or valid examination of a set of information can be made by them. All that can happen, is they can choose whether the information appeals to them because it suits their pre-existing bias, or whether it does not appeal to them because it shoots holes in their world view so wide, that you could pilot a damned aircraft carrier through them.

THAT is the thing that needs to change. It is not the presence of information that does the most harm, but the lack of will to do the right thing with that information, to be honest, intelligent and to hold more rigidly to the facts than the fluff with which they are surrounded. That being said, if people refuse to resist the propaganda they are being fed, refuse to accept truth when it is placed before them, the danger is that ANY information will start to be accepted, just on the basis of how people FEEL about it, rather than because that information carries any intrinsic weight of truth.

These are difficult and trying times, but they are such because of what people do with information, not because the information exists.

You know something that would be a good feature here kind of like flags and stars would be to have long term trusted members be able to vote the likelihood of the article being presented as credible, something like a check mark tied to links that help verify the article also with the name of the person that verified the article as genuine.

Forum post sums it up.

Rather oddly, the conspiracy sites often contain some of the best debunking work available. Debunkers like to go there, as there are usually some easy pickings, but most of the debunking comes from the conspiracy theorists themselves. The more serious conspiracy theorists are wary of their topic being cast in a bad light by being associated with the more fringe topics. So if they see something that is obviously bunk (like, the WTC being destroyed by a directed energy weapon from space), then they are quite quick to debunk it. Since there's a wide range of participants on those forums, there is often a quite lively and extended discussion, where the salient points and real evidence will bubble to the surface. The true believers will remain convinced, but your strange bedfellow debunker will often do all the necessary work for you. Its also funny to be able to link to ATS as supporting evidence. Of course, the hard-core are convinced that ATS is COINTELPRO. Can't win 'em all.

No Publicity is Bad Publicity.

Don't you know that?

a reply to: PhotonEffect

People have to be practiced in being skeptical to the point where they put some effort into digging deeper and not just accepting things at face value.

originally posted by: enament
a reply to: carewemust

I'm suspicious especially since FOX or CNN are not listed there, this is really suspicious.

that's because they can be SUED FOR DAMAGES AND HAVE DEEP POCKETS, unlike a low information, keyboard, tin-hat nut.

originally posted by: enament
a reply to: PhotonEffect

People have to be practiced in being skeptical to the point where they put some effort into digging deeper and not just accepting things at face value.

I call these emotional-thinkers, instead of critical-thinkers

a reply to: DJW001

My main beef was ATS is NOT a news site at all, its a message board, I would have no beef if it said. Message board sites that present news from its members is untrustworthy for the most part.

I still wouldn't agree with that but it would still be more factual than calling it a news site.

a reply to: jimmyx

Makes sense but I believe she is a Clinton supporter from what i read so, she likes the pro Hillary supporters.

a reply to: DJW001

Yes, and let's not forget that ATS was at least at one point, and may still be, a news generator - dubbed ATS NEWS

Here's one of a many such threads:
ATS News With Johnny Anonymous: "Kenyan-Born Obama?"

a reply to: enament

Whatever happened to that weekly video ATS did? That would have qualified as "news media."

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Their logic is sound, until you get to the point that this is a "media" or "news" site.

I guess if you focus on the UFO/Alien/Woo that we love, then they are right. But if its about politics, we don't make the news, we copy/paste it to discuss.

ATS allows alt-media to use it as a platform. There are members who consistently link to a one particular cluster of media sites or another. We are, in effect, a combination of a multi-stream news network and a social network. You cannot deny that groups will use a variety of tactics, including sock puppets and cyber-bullying, to advance their agenda. It is disingenuous to claim that we are not "media."

Those tactics cut across the political and cultural spectrum. And, when it happens, ATS members need to call it out. I can't believe anyone who calls themselves either an alternative thinker or a CTer would want ATS deciding what is fake or not. That's what discussion is for. Vetting. And, if that's where the discussion leads, we have forums to deal with it. Dissecting Disinformation, Education and Media, LOL and Hoax.

a reply to: kosmicjack

Those tactics cut across the political and cultural spectrum.

Correct. And yes, it's up to us to keep a sharp eye.

a reply to: DJW001

Not sure , but that segment was independent of ATS but only featured here, one episode he did left a bad taste in my mouth.

originally posted by: enament
a reply to: enament

Mind Blown FOX isn't listed there either.

Exactly, who can forget them on a list like that?