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.

 

What determines the credibility of a news source here?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:24 AM
link   
We have the likes of secureteam quite rightly not allowed due to hoaxing but what about plain old reporting bias and false reporting? There is at least one news station which falls into this category, CNN, and lately whenever someone posts a story and uses a link to CNN most people LOL at the link. If a majority of people who use this site LOL at CNN links and are unable to take them seriously, shouldn't they not be allowed to be used as a credible source seeing as they are, incredible?




posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:27 AM
link   
Bias is the answer you're looking for. The term "fake news" has muddied the waters, as intended.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheMadTitan
"" What determines the credibility of a news source here? ""

We have the likes of secureteam quite rightly not allowed due to hoaxing but what about plain old reporting bias and false reporting? There is at least one news station which falls into this category, CNN, and lately whenever someone posts a story and uses a link to CNN most people LOL at the link. If a majority of people who use this site LOL at CNN links and are unable to take them seriously, shouldn't they not be allowed to be used as a credible source seeing as they are, incredible?


It's not about "Credibility" anymore.

It's about "Crudibility".





posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:47 AM
link   
a reply to: TheMadTitan

CNN are not false news, or most of the MSN

They may be biased to a political side, so don’t watch them if they offend your political beliefs



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: TheMadTitan

At this point, credibility seems to be in the eye of the beholder.

In my seldom humble opinion, there are no truly credible news sources -- i.e., giving us the facts and just the facts and all the facts. Everyone has their spin. And we get the facts that support that spin -- nothing more and nothing less.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: TheMadTitan
Official ATS announcements have been made about a very few sources, that they are regarded as hoax sites, and threads based on them will be treated as such. The annuncements are made by threads which sometimes get bumped.
For anything else, the reader decides for himself. Caveat Emptor.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: TheMadTitan

The source that you, personally agree with, is reliable.

Those that you, personally, don’t agree with, is not.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Whereismypassword

a reply to: TheMadTitan

CNN are not false news



Sure.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: TheMadTitan

At this point, credibility seems to be in the eye of the beholder.

In my seldom humble opinion, there are no truly credible news sources -- i.e., giving us the facts and just the facts and all the facts. Everyone has their spin. And we get the facts that support that spin -- nothing more and nothing less.


Sadly this is true. As long as there are opposing agendas there will always be spin, a perpetual state of push/pull.
edit on CST05America/ChicagoJanam30CST5431am by TheMadTitan because: a word



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 05:57 AM
link   
It's one thing to knowingly perpetuate a hoax that has been created, to push a profit based agenda (st10) with monetised videos, it is another to be a so called news source that muddies the waters between fact and falsehood.

Someone can make a thread saying they saw bigfoot and captured him, post pictures of a slaughtered gorilla, knowing they were trying to fool the membership. They would be called out, if not banned. ST10 know the majority of the stuff they post on their YT channel, is fake. But do so willingly for money.

But the likes of CNN are not creating the content, just pushing their own agenda with it.

It's up to the reader, in this case, to determine the legitimacy of the content. I've seen CNN take a legitimate thing, and twist it with their own 'actors' to then push it as truth... but there is no real evidence that they intended to do anything more than push their own one sided reporting. In an of itself, still based on a legitimate event.

fake news is different to a blatant hoax.

ST10: Proof of ET, this video shows a huge alien mothership decelerating past the planet Saturn on it's way to the moon *shows video with eery music, of terrible CGI*
CNN: Bad people caught doing bad things *shows video of a real event, but with their slant*

That's my take on it, anyway.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheMadTitan

originally posted by: Whereismypassword

a reply to: TheMadTitan

CNN are not false news



Sure.


No they are not fake or false news, and the worrying thing is they and other organisations are having death threats issued to them from mentally unstable people



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Yes, the issue is CNN don't actively just make stuff up. Unlike a lot of other sites that just make stuff up blatantly.


People don't like CNN because of the anti-Trump opinion pieces they run. But their basic facts are usually fairly reliable.

(Far more so than Fox, which still holds the record for network news station that tells the biggest porkies.)



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: TheMadTitan


As long as there are opposing agendas there will always be spin, a perpetual state of push/pull.


It's pretty darn sad. But that's how folks wanted it -- and what we've got.

I'm old enough to remember when news agencies were expected to report the facts -- and only the facts -- and opinions were restricted to the editorials page. And if one side was presented, then the other side must be presented as well -- a point-counterpoint type thing. Just like those old SNL skits with Dan Akroyd and Jane Curtin. It was once a real thing. It wasn't perfect, but it was sure better than what passes for "news" these days.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:26 AM
link   
For the most part:

Anything positive about Trump, or Democrats are running a satanic cult who molest and sacrifice children because they email each other about pizza = honest and excellent journalism.

Anything negative about Trump, or anything positive about a democrat = bigly fake news.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TheMadTitan

ATS has no standard for credibility, beyond banning sites that have been known to perpetrate outright hoaxes. The internet has now made every individual responsible for applying critical thinking to any claim they come across. The '16 election is proof that information has been weaponized. The only defense is to sharpen your reasoning and research skills.

If something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't true. If it does not challenge your assumptions, it may be lulling you into a false sense of security. Don't pay undue attention to people with no stake in the game; they have nothing to lose by lying. People making videos in their basement probably don't have enough contact with other human beings to know what is really going on. Be leery of catchphrases that divert from thought: "Fake News." "Lying media."

It is possible to know the truth, but you have to work at it. It gets harder every day, but here's a clue: television is ephemeral and relies on sensationalism; the internet is a playground for liars and thieves. Printed matter cannot be deleted with a keystroke or banished from memory by a new outrage. Read. Propagandists do not want you to read because it gives you time to think.

That is all.
edit on 30-1-2018 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: LordAhriman
For the most part:

Anything positive about Trump, or Democrats are running a satanic cult who molest and sacrifice children because they email each other about pizza = honest and excellent journalism.

Anything negative about Trump, or anything positive about a democrat = bigly fake news.


This post deserves a star. The only point to the OP is that s/he seems to want to get CNN banned as a source here. As I said, information has been weaponized. RT praised Trump during the election, but look what it has to say now:

www.rt.com...

www.rt.com...



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 06:55 AM
link   
Simple. If it supports trump it's real. If it doesn't it's not.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 07:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Simple. If it supports trump it's real. If it doesn't it's not.


You're the CNN/Clinton sycophant.

^ shows how you think on these topics.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: TheMadTitan

Well for me pretty much any news source is questionable.
I'll post a link below to a blog that shows that 15 supposed credible news sources used research done by a nine year old and treated it a fact.

And yes it's a blog, but it has links to all 15 uses.

The kid says that America throws away 500 million plastic straws a day.

reason.com...


I trust nobody



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: badw0lf

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Simple. If it supports trump it's real. If it doesn't it's not.


You're the CNN/Clinton sycophant.

^ shows how you think on these topics.


Shows you are a Fox News /Trump sycophant. See how easy that was? No thought required. Stop being an echo and start using your brain, please. Our country needs to find something to unite it before it's too late. Let's hope it doesn't take the form of an alleged "North Korean attack."




top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join