U.K. Bans the words fake news in official documents

Very.


a reply to: oldcarpy

a reply to: lakenheath24

You still can't spell "Aluminium", though.

Its bad aint it. I mentioned spanking the monkey the other day and 10 people called the Animal cops on me.

a reply to: RAY1990

a reply to: and14263

There's absolutely nothing stopping 'the majority of media outlets' from continuing to use the phrase or anyone else to use the phrase when describing the bollocks that they are saying.

It only applies to official government documents who from now on use more accurate terms like disinformation etc.

What is so frigging hard to understand about this and exactly where is the #ing problem?

I will take that over my capital being in a different country.



a reply to: oldcarpy

a reply to: lakenheath24

How so?

a reply to: Freeborn

You make your point as delicately as ever, Mr Freeborn.

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: surfer_soul

I'd personally say it's easy to have opinions... A little harder to challenge a government or challenge it's accountability and/or inaccuracies.

Then again, it isn't that hard to challenge them either. Nor to raise awareness, not in this day and age.

I would say it’s going the other way, governments are desperate to censor opinions and information they don’t like. True enough for a while the internet helped with raising awareness but now that information is so mixed up misinformation or “fake news” many don’t know what is actually true. We are entering an age where everything will just be opinion or seen as such.

a reply to: lakenheath24

I tried to send you a link to Roger's Profanisaurus, a compendium of profane euphemisms which I thought you may appreciate but my work computer disapproves. Here is a taster:

Roger's Profanisaurus

Hope you enjoy.

a reply to: oldcarpy

Your capital, it's in Brussels, which is in Belgium, which is in another counntry. Geez, even this dumb yank knows that.

a reply to: lakenheath24

Not for very much longer, sunshine.

a reply to: oldcarpy

I am not your typical self-respecting expat.....I have a Viz subscription.

a reply to: oldcarpy

We will see....when your whipping boy Corben takes power next...all bets are off.

originally posted by: Freeborn
What is so frigging hard to understand about this and exactly where is the #ing problem?

This thread is a great example of how people read what they want instead of what is written.

Sad.

On topic, I never liked the expression "fake news" because it means nothing and is used mostly against news people do not like, regardless of their veracity.

a reply to: surfer_soul

People are stupid, as I've always said individuals tend not to be.

People should learn to think for themselves, learn to verify news, learn to fact check. These days google will do the hard work for you.

Go to the source. Think about the nature of the information given. For instance a news article might claim 38% of people fear Islam yet only 125 people were asked, asked in an area where "asian" rape gangs operated. That's hardly a representative statistic of all people.

Anyways, I've never been censored and I talk a load of crap. Often on controversial topics.

It also depends on your source of news. I strictly use the BBC and then verify from sources if it tickles my fancy... My bs detector works well and I'm not keen on wasting my time. So Facebook isn't news to me, it's parody. But if I'm to be frank, all large media corporations are relatively accurate, they'll spin certain topics but then so does the BBC...

The government censoring things?

I could write all day about that, it's nothing new. It's challenged and yeah, sometimes the reasoning is flimsy, not always though.

a reply to: 727Sky


At 1.51 in this vid Richard talks about a security camera in Bagdahd , which was overlooked by the people trying to present this fake news bombing , where it was said eight people got killed and thirty were injured. When it was realised that not only did the people setting the bomb and the actors taking their positions was inadvertently captured by this rogue camera.A spin story was set up to explain the fake attack. This is why fake news is now banned ,because after seeing this its hard to believe anything that the MSM put out as real news.

originally posted by: anonentity
This is why fake news is now banned ,because after seeing this its hard to believe anything that the MSM put out as real news.

I think the problem is more complex.

Mainstream media now, because of the competition from online sources that don't have the huge expenses the big companies have and can have almost as much visibility, accepts almost any thing people give them, making themselves easy targets for hoaxes. One example is how many newspaper sites started having sections in which anyone can register and write their article. That article will have a link from a real mainstream media, but it's not news and it's not the site's official opinion, it's just someone's opinion.

Today, the border between "news" and "opinion" is too blurred, making it almost impossible to know what's real and what's not just by looking at it.

a reply to: ArMaP

All the major news services get the same wires for cover stories at the same time.
There is a choreography there that used to be controlled by a much tighter network.
The news was an illusion then and is still often an illusion, its just easier to cross check with the internet.
"fake news" is a relative term as many news stories have multi level transparency.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: and14263

I think you will find that we Brits had already thought about that for ourselves some time ago.

We Brits. I'm an Englishman. And no, most of the population lap it up with their fake lips, eyebrows and abs.

a reply to: Freeborn

Pew pew.