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.

 

'Good fake news' vs 'Bad fake news'.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:41 AM
link   
It used to be 'good news' and 'bad news'. Even that was slanted, especially back in the day of the 'big three' networks.

This is pretty well accepted as common knowledge.

Taking it to the next level, we now have a film industry styled news media. Complete with 'producers', directors, paid actors, film editors, so on, that is pure Hollywood.

In the next Academy awards, we need a fake news segment complete with trophies and acknowledgements for the best fake news production. Much talent resides here and should be rewarded.

We are entertained!

One category would be 'Best influence of public opinion'. As our public opinion is completely based on our 'media', then one should acknowledge the news story which best affected that public opinion. Yes?

Reality TV on steroids.

Have I missed any categories that deserve mention?

Please put forth your nomination for 'Best Fake News Story of the Year'. There MUST qualifications to the nominations. It must be an original, not a 'spin-off'. Spin offs, if the ATS members agree, would have their own separate category. You must be an ATS member to qualify for nominations, but voting for the winning nomination is open to one and all.

We will set a date for the final tally and ATS can then broadly announce the winners....




posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker


Meh, no traction on this one.....



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

What is the time frame? Is it like Jan 1 2017 to the present?



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

By reading the title of the thread, I figured this would have been a thread comparing good fake news that had a positive result vs bad fake news that had negative results.

But it's actually about the best fake news story of the year?

Hmmmm. So thread isn't about what the title says it's about.

ok.



You must be an ATS member to qualify for nominations, but voting for the winning nomination is open to one and all.


What?

I don't believe the general public can post on the site. So they would have to be members to both qualify and nominate.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Sure, CNN, ABC etc etc are fake news. The only real problem with this and Trumps calling them out is that he left out all the right wing fake news, like Breitbart, Fox News and that buffoons on talk radio.

If your'e going to call out fake news, call out all of them...both sides. Why walk around with blinders on?

Anyone else see a problem with this?



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
a reply to: nwtrucker

What is the time frame? Is it like Jan 1 2017 to the present?


Say the full year of 2017. (Amendable, of course.) That allows for multiple nominations and the possibility of even greater productions in the remainder of the year...



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
Sure, CNN, ABC etc etc are fake news. The only real problem with this and Trumps calling them out is that he left out all the right wing fake news, like Breitbart, Fox News and that buffoons on talk radio.

If your'e going to call out fake news, call out all of them...both sides. Why walk around with blinders on?

Anyone else see a problem with this?


Is there anything in the OP that suggests a partisan view??

All are open to awards......



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: nwtrucker

By reading the title of the thread, I figured this would have been a thread comparing good fake news that had a positive result vs bad fake news that had negative results.

But it's actually about the best fake news story of the year?

Hmmmm. So thread isn't about what the title says it's about.

ok.



You must be an ATS member to qualify for nominations, but voting for the winning nomination is open to one and all.


What?

I don't believe the general public can post on the site. So they would have to be members to both qualify and nominate.


Actually, I had the same thought and intention you voiced on the title. I toyed with changing the title and ended up distracted elsewhere. Now that you point out what my original intent in the thread was....it morphed into this. satire.

That would open the door for a new category, 'positive resulting fake news' ?

As far as others outside the ATS community, I allowed the unlikely possibility that somehow this could gain traction outside the ATS, with the ATS the deciding body on categories, nominees, runner-ups and winners.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert


P.S. envision the MSM OR the right wing media with even one top name entering the nomination process. The rest would pile one, especially on slow news days, and the Game of Thrones begin...


We'd probably have to rename it, Something like 'The Above Academy
Awards'.

If it gets the traction here, that is. A broad shoot E-mail to all potential pundits, commentators, etc..


Idle speculation on my part.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 07:02 PM
link   
I nominate this for the "Don't believe your lying eyes ..." category.




posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
I nominate this for the "Don't believe your lying eyes ..." category.



The nomination is accepted, provisionally. I would ask for volunteers to act as judges in the nominations. They should reflect both sides as well as the middle.

I recuse myself....



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Yea and it used to be FAKE was FAKE!



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: nwtrucker

Yea and it used to be FAKE was FAKE!



I'd say it's reached new heights. Wouldn't you?




top topics



 
3

log in

join