It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Separation between "real news" and "fake news" has disappeared

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 05:34 PM
We have all noticed the close relationship between president o ama dn the mainstream media, and obama just finished doing an interview with NBC that will be a two part prime time special, but out of the kindness of his heart, he did an additional bit.

Mr. Obama, however, went even one step further for the network – participating in a spoof interview segment for “The Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien” during his formal question-and-answer session with the NBC News anchor Brian Williams at the White House. In the segment, shown on “Tonight” late Tuesday, Mr. Williams asked Mr. Obama whether he almost canceled his overseas trip this week “to stay and watch” Mr. O’Brien’s “first week as host of ‘The Tonight Show.’’’ Mr. Obama was fully game and, referring to Mr. O’Brien’s succession this week of the former “Tonight” host Jay Leno, joked, “This is something we discussed several times in the Oval Office, how to manage this transition between Leno and Conan. And I think he’s up to the task. But I just want him to know that there is not going to any bailout coming out from Washington if he screws it up.”

New York Times

ha ha very funny. president pretends the new host of tonight show is big event that deserves his serious consideration. he's such a good sport!

Today I also learned that my own favorite funnyman Stephen Colbert will be guest editor of Nenwsweek, a serious news magazine.

Mr. Colbert said that the “conventional wisdom” of his earnest, super-conservative Comedy Central character will be peppered throughout the issue, which will include an essay he will write, but that much of the content in the magazine will be treated with the utmost seriousness. “We had input into what the stories are going to be," Mr. Colbert said Mr. Colbert will help design the cover of the magazine, he’ll write an editor’s note and he’ll be adding annotations to Mr. Meacham’s weekly editor’s note. Mr. Colbert said that he helped hand out assignments, and will play around with columnist’s biographies and help pick out pull quotes for stories. There will be a section dedicated to all the unpublished letters to the editor Mr. Colbert has written to Newsweek since he was a kid.

New York Observer

I love the Colbert Report, just last night was LOL at Prescott Pharmaceuticals with all its crazy drugs "cheating death" promoted by Stephen Colbert, DFA, but his show is based on fake news, or maybe distorted news. Yes he has serious guests an he has the great "better know a district" series, but you can't ever be quite sure of what's true and what's tweaked for laughs. THAT'S THE POINT OF THE SHOW.

so now we have the president promoting a comedy show for laughs, and we have a comedian editing Newsweek for serious readers of the news. Yes, the line has been blurred for a long time but I really think that this takes it to a new level (or depth). What parts of what the president says are true and what for laughs? What part of Newsweek are serious and what for laughs?

This seems to be random, that they were announced on the same day, but i think they are part and parcel of a continuing effort to mix us up completely. It's already become hard to believe what is going on, now it will be impossible to know what is intended to be true and accurate and what exaggeration for laughs.

It might very well spell the end of the "professional" news industry. That has been teetering because of the bias but now we will probably have to rely on bloggers and websites who don't claim to be impartial, but report "news" of interest. we will have to muddle through completely without help from newscasters.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 05:58 PM
Muddle through without newscasters? Oh woe! Oh distress!

Come on - they have worn clown suits and red noses for the last 20 years, and you say the line is now getting blurred?

Quoting O'Rielly "Who regulates the media? We can say anything we like!"

Stop listening to the lies - thats all that it is. The only reason to watch it is to assess what their message is, that is what opinion they want people to have - then deriving their reason to create that opinion. Every SINGLE news story has a purpose - even if it to just waste some time so they don't have to cover anything important.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 06:36 PM
i was just watching telly for the first time in ages and all that was on seemed to be programs that in some way pretended to be involving real unsuspecting people - who just happened to be bad actors, i know for a fact that these programs are all fake (i often work at tv studios when bands practice there) but to be honest only a real moron would fall for them - i speak of shows like 'the real hustle' in which they trick unsuspecting members of the public out of money, its all so fake its nonsense.

What i dont get is WHY are there so many of these shows? part of me is sure that it's because THEY know by ruining peoples ability to tell whats real and fake we will become more willing to accept their lies, false events and mock political games.

Then again it could also be because we're a society with so little regard for the truth you could almost call it contempt.

What with the news and fake news getting merged together, fake 'real life' tv programs, fake true life stories, fake real sex lives, etc, etc what is this doing to peoples subliminal mind? Are they hoping to bypass our rational brain and shortcut directly to the 'oh well thats how it is' bit of the brain we resigns us to the truth?

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 06:51 PM
There is no such thing as fake news.

line 2.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 06:57 PM
reply to post by NatureBoy

I forgot about that stuff. I haven't seen the one you refer to, but i want to scream at the endless parade of "reality shows" that are semi-scripted competitions that involve amateurs rather than professional actors. I think this originally came about because actors started demanding such gigantic fees per episode. I remember all the talk during Seinfeld. Can't remember the huge amounts, then Friends. All the successful series were paying those actors huge money, which they can't have liked. then that first writers strike came along and it was much easier to do reality tv than wait for writers to come back. now everybody is back, as far as i know, but it's still almost all reality type shows. even somethimg like house hunters is not in any way spontaneous, though it preteds to be.

but i'm really talking about news here. "real" news and "fake" news, but like you say, we really can no longer tell the difference. it's become one and the same. i'm sure it makes it easier for "them" to do whatever they want, but it's still disturbing. that will probably pass into a haze........

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:10 PM
No news is good news.
I saw the special.

I know, I saw the Conan spot cause Obama did go on
Leno and he was hoping to give some credence to any
future appearance for the unknown Conan.

The special had meetings with briefs that I could only imagine
were coming from some room in the back full of writers.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:18 PM
maybe i'm the only person left who thinks there is or should be a difference between news and fake news. I watch reporters and think they are telling me things that happened. I watch jon stewart or stephen colbert and laugh at the satire about the news. to me, it is not the same thing. does ANYBODY think news should be reported in a straightforward fashion? commentators are a different story. they comment on the news. sean hannity and bill oreilly are commentators. they don't represent themselves as reporters. katie couric and brian williams represent themselves as reporters. in england i think they would be called presenters. the point is, they aren't supposed to be commenting.

so is president obama a reality show?

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 08:36 AM
reply to post by earlywatcher

i was reading google news last nite, got halfway down an article then realized it was from the onion, however some other site had ripped it off so i couldn't even tell it was satire by the URL! What a stupid sham, its getting harder and harder to trust what you read is even slightly close to the truth - at least right wing and left wing ideologs always give themselves away with talking points.

I really am starting to think you're onto something the more i think about this, maybe by mixing up the internet news feeds the big guys hope we'll just turn back to fox, cnn, bbc, etc and ignore things like indymedia, etc.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 04:46 PM
reply to post by NatureBoy

I forgot about The Onion. Thanks for reminding me! that's an excellent source of fake news an i've been fooled more than once by a story. in fact i've seen threads started here on Onion stories that the poster thought were real. if it's a video, you watch for the little insignia. but stories are ow so distorted, spun, in the "real" press that stuff sounds crazy too.

Another thing that can be confusing is tv series that are definitely fiction but take real life incidents or behavior into the plot so that we feel kind of like we know about these things, that we experienced these things. I'm thinking of the time a few months ago when I was watching The Wire on dvd. it was the season that featured the baltimore mayoral race, and all sorts of backroom shenanigans were taking place. I watched a couple of episodes one evening, then got up to hear that gov rod Blagoyvitch of chicago was under arrest for pay to play schemes. i watched all this stuff on the news and realized i couldn't quite remember which stuff was an episode from The Wire and what was really happening. particularly since blagoyvitch's exploits were even more outrageous than those on the series.

The world has become a very confusing place.

new topics


log in