On the Subject of Fake News

I found some writings I did a while ago which may be relevant to ATS:

News: biased snapshot communicating 2% of an entire story, designed solely to make money for the organization. Often misunderstood to be ‘an informative service’.

Fake News. Otherwise known as propaganda, spin or sensationalism.

The finely tuned skill of taking a mundane piece of information and manipulating it for the following reasons:

Create hype and furore around a story to get the readership talking – with the end result of increasing sales and sales of advertising space within the medium. Increased revenue at the detriment of society.

Link the information to a current news agenda or moral panic – again, for the purpose of pushing the story into the public eye, to create a furore and force more people to talk about the furore thus leading to publicity for the medium and increased sales and advertising sales. Increased revenue at the detriment of society.

To further an agenda integral to the editorial bias. Again, this ultimately has the target of upping revenue but can be employed as apolitical tool. Hence why many newspaper editors are closely linked to political parties. Mainstream news and media is a perfect stream of communication from the elites to the masses. Used correctly, it is a tool of control.

To manipulate and control the minds of the populace. This could be as ‘innocent’ as making a reader buy a product due to clever product placement or it could be as extreme as influencing an election (!).


How do we spot fake news?

1) An integral piece of information is mentioned as the source of a story but this integral piece of information is never shown, linked to, quoted from in full or analysed. Its contents are often skewed to the extreme by clever use of a thesaurus.

In one of the craziest examples, the University of Manchester Students' Union has decided to ban clapping and cheering at union events because it is discriminatory and non-inclusive.

Source

If we want to be an informed reader the first thing we should do here is stop reading and look for an official source outlining the ban. Because perhaps we should be trusting our instincts here when we think, ‘surely this is nonsense?’.

When we dig a little deeper and find an official spokesperson for the University all becomes clear:

“The policy was proposed in order to encourage the use of British Sign Language (BSL) clapping during our democratic events to make those events more accessible and inclusive for all. We are not banning audible clapping – we understand that some people may be more comfortable to continue using it.”

Source

Unfortunately by this time 90% of the population are disgusted by the snowflake students who have BANNED CLAPPING in favour of a minority on campus, you’re in the 10% left behind who want to discuss the story logically. You do realise there is no place for logic and common sense in the world right?



2) So-called ‘peers’ reinforcing the message.

Usually an ill-informed celebrity or a celebrity motivated by the agenda of his payroll providers will tweet out some nonsense which the media will use to back up their story. In all instances the tweet or post is just as ill-informed as the article itself.

Take the example here, you have to scroll down to find the tweet:

Same link as above

A tweet from Jeremy Vine, a self-righteous radio DJ in the UK, who is looked up to by those who read the Guardian and place themselves on a moral high ground. His input is worth millions to the integrity of a fake news story. If Jeremy Vine says it, it must be true! The journalist who found this tweet probably wet him/herself because Jeremy manages to relate the story to the 100 year armistice anniversary! God, these guys should get medals in emotional manipulation.

In addition to quotes from ‘peers’ the MSM also includes a comments section for the public to use, a brilliant way of pushing ignorant arguments to the forefront of a story… The reader can even get involved! Such joy.



3) I would also say - The use of emotive language to ‘trigger’ the audience.
Generally if you see the following words used in a piece of news it is fake in some respect, or ‘spun’ at least.
Snowflake, SJW, triggered, anxious, fear, safe-place, etc etc



4) Another mode de employ is to make the reader forget about middle ground – you know, the area where analytical thought resides. ‘Sitting on the fence’ – a derogatory term for anybody with an agnostic approach to complicated things – like Brexit and the economy (!).

The readers are forced to disregard analytical thought and pick one side over another.

This ensures the futile argument created from a futile piece of fake news is argued over by both sides of the population and kept alive in vehement vain.

A brilliant example of this is the two party politic system which exists in the majority of Western countries. This is starting to be challenged as independents and single goal parties emerge but it still remains, the UK and USA are based around a two party system.
We are constantly being told to be for or against, black or white, reps or dems, left or right… Almost every topic up for debate is simplified into a two sided argument.

One should be suspicious when being forced to make a choice between two extremes, when in reality a sliding scale of analysis is often the best position.


I could go on forever. Almost every story in the news is spun to the point of death. Here’s an extract from something a wrote for another reason a while ago, it fits here:

Journalism Tricks for Clicks

It is no secret that the news media’s objective, no matter which organization, is to make money, not to educate and inform. Perhaps in the 80s the emphasis was on educating and informing, giving the people information and letting the people decide. However as viewing figures drop (a piece of quantative data based on a miniscule fraction of television sets – another story) the organizations look for ways to hook people back into their media. The way to get people back on side is to pluck their heart strings, play on their emotions. Emotions are personal, if a person becomes emotional about a subject they have personally bought into that subject and are much more likely to ‘tune-in’ regularly. Note, modern day viewing figures are ‘clicks’ rather than actual seated viewers.

The newspapers begin to employ less-subtle tactics to hook us in.

1) Beautiful alliterative headlines, ‘Labour’s Lost It’, ‘Filth and Fury’, ‘Patsies, Petrol and the Politics of Panic’. These phrases which flow from the tongue like melted mars bars aren’t just pretty to look at, our brains LOVE them.
We’re cave beings who once banged out rhythms on a drum, these headlines appeal to our innate conditioning and our brain wants to know more, what’s behind these headlines?

2) Motifs – repeated stereotypical pictures to condition our opinions. It doesn’t matter what he’s done, who he is, or what his name is but if it’s a head shot of a generic muslim with a beard the media will plaster this head shot all over. Do you remember when we didn’t know what muslims were? When Muslims weren’t evil? Then 9-11 followed by hundreds of generic stereotypical headshots linked with fearful emotive headlines slowly worked their way into our brains, they conditioned us into believing, knowing, that Muslims were evil.

It’s working. Society are watching the news again and buying papers. We’re all fired up over Muslims and fearful of terrorism.

Each individual has their very own viewpoint, a mirror of what their favourite newspaper is telling them to think, but it feels right so what the hell.

a reply to: and14263

All news is fake news. They will say anything to create outrage. OUTRAGE = RATINGS = MONEY

News should be on the edge of boring. If whatever they say creates an emotional reaction then it's fake news. There are 340 million people in this country. Cherry picking BS to create outrage is not representative of what is actually going on.

google "manufacturing consent"

a reply to: dfnj2015

News should be on the edge of boring.

I think what you say here is a realistic view. It reminds me of something else I wrote a while ago:

Remember a time when the news was boring? I recall the 6 o’clock news with its 1980s light blue and grey opening, the presenter wore a grey suit and the delivery of news was in a serious and monotonous droll. This was the BBC back in the 1980s, non-biased, respectable balanced reporting. I admit as a child I wouldn’t have known if a report was biased or not but the general consensus and the merit the BBC still rides the coat tails of is the fact that in the 80s the BBC were not entirely biased.

Fake news is just the tip of the ice berg. We are irrational emotional animals. The technology to control the masses is highly advanced and sophisticated. Over 100 years of psychological research has proven exactly what works and what doesn't. The American people are a fiddle that get's played to cast votes:

a reply to: and14263

Good topic. Nice thread.

a reply to: and14263

I was onto this a while ago, but you kicked my ass in explaining it.

The line between opinion piece and journalist is blurred beyond recognition. I was watching SKY news (an affiliate of FOX) and there was a segment called-and i kid you not-"leftist loonies' but the moment any media watch dog calls out someones numerical or Freudian slip, they start screaming 'leftist!' and attack the multiple sources that have undeniable evidence.

There is probably some investigative journalists in Yemen that are in fear of a mortar drop, but meanwhile, in America...

"coming up on the late news, Donald Trump drops a cup of coffee, is he a litterer? How many years has he hidden this secret? And is Hillary Clinton a Holocaust denier? More at eleven."

One tip to Americans-look outside to box and seek foreign media outlets, that way you can get a litmus test on the state of the US media, it's not the worst but nike.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Thanks, this topic has always been of interest to me and I wrote this a few days ago whilst multitasking.

The advice on looking at foreign media outlets is a great one, I forget to do that myself... It really does put things into perspective.

With regards to journalists, it's something I need to think more about, but I believe they are not journalists anymore. They are story fishers and regurgitators. I'm not sure they are conscious what they are doing is damaging and not journalism.

The "news" today is probably 2-5% news. The rest is rubbish, not only to get clicks, but to distract citizens from the REAL PERPETRATORS pillaging the earth & society in countless ways.

I.E., the big banks, big healthcare, big media, big government -- and although some of these terms are used, the actual individuals hiding behind those generic nomenclatures never get light shed on them.

The most atrocious and evil conspiracies, which are based in fact, is the most protected "news" in our world today.

THAT is the reason for this news. With the information highway made available to all, division becomes all the more important in order to keep the status quo intact for generations to come.

S&F btw!

a reply to: six67seven

Yes, I do agree, a huge driving force behind the nonsense is, as you say:

I.E., the big banks, big healthcare, big media, big government -- and although some of these terms are used, the actual individuals hiding behind those generic nomenclatures never get light shed on them.

As the saying goes, 'follow the money'.

I liked it better when it was called Propaganda

a reply to: Butterfinger

I think Donald has a problem with long words.... Ooohhhhh I feel so bad saying that but I couldn't resist.

(Sorry President Trump, I do respect some of your policies!).