"...the end of fake news and, in many ways, the end of real news"

This was a comment made by Brian Stelter, media analyst for CNN, regarding the events today concerning Jon Stewart and Brian Williams.

It sounds somewhat overly dramatic and he was being facetious - but is it?

In a world of Twitter, Instagram, FB, You Tube and other social media platforms - like ATS - is there really a need to get our information from a traditional, corporate produced and corporate sponsored media outlet? I think maybe not.

During big stories like Boston or Ferguson I would be on ATS and have the "news" on in the background. More often than not, I would get info first from the internet. And many times it seemed the broadcast or cable networks were reading along with ATS, especially during the MH370 incident.

Arguments regarding the credibility of broadcast or cable news as compared to the internet don't seem to hold water in the face of incidents like this with Brian Williams or with the controversy over weapons of mass destruction leading up to Iraq. Add to it the historical argument about television simply being used as a tool for propaganda and it doesn't bolster confidence.

So what do you think ATS? Are we entering a post "news" era?

I actually use ATS for my news. It has comprehensive coverage and any bias or error is immediately exposed by the membership. Why would I waste time on MSM outlets?

a reply to: Metallicus

I likewise got to ATS first. I then see what left-leaning and right-leaning news outlets (supposedly HA HA) with fact checking report to see where the thread is going.

a reply to: kosmicjack

To quote an old Beach Boys tune...

"wouldn't it be nice"

I have my doubts, ATS and the folks here, stay tuned into news, and are pretty good at picking holes in the big stories, highlighting bias, wondering why we are blitzed by events that on the whole seem benign to what we face collectively...

In this day and age of the web, to find news, you have to want to know, seek it out, and plenty of times even for those who are inquisitive, we are left hanging...

Personally, I don't think a change in what medium news is presented, signifies a win for the folks, it's just a larger ocean of info to wade through for those who really want to know...

And that reflects on US, the folks, more than it does the media, they are only concerned with profits, and keeping their affiliation with those who help them garner those profits...

I try and come up with an answer to how we can get folks interested, but so far TPTB have done a great job of focusing attention on things that really don't matter in the day to day grind, though it satisfies folks' desire to escape from that same grind..

The answer may be just out of reach, but at least we have a good start with the folks here setting the example once more wake up...

originally posted by: kosmicjack

So what do you think ATS? Are we entering a post "news" era?

Personally, I think we're still in for more of the same. The MSM is a useful tool for TPTB. I can say with some level of certainty, until someone figures out a better method, they're not gonna throw out the baby with the bath water. I do harbor some hope that journalists and anchors (not opinion columnists mind you) will tread a bit more carefully in the short term.

Hate to be the wet blanket.

I figure we're already there. People have been dropping out of TV and cable, moving onto the internet for news and entertainment for some time now. However, the MSM nor mainstream audiences that don't follow social media(far and few between these days) don't know this. The recent John Williams events is a big wake up call. Plus it's a good reminder of that for those who don't know that.

After all, these news anchors are just actors anyway peddling news as entertainment with sides of agenda whilst reading AP, Reuters, etc-that most of us have access before they do. The end of real news? How much of what they regurgitate(from paid for studies to agenda driven topics) was real news anyway, instead of just being treated as official news because of alphabet news agencies.

There are some instances where social media trumps news agencies, particularly in terms of something like the speed of breaking news on Twitter but that's about it.

Why do I say that social media, blogs, etc aren't any better? Because 99% of the time people are just regurgitating what they read from either a news agency or worse, a 3rd party like a blog with a writer who inserts another whole level of bias. It's like playing the game "Telephone" (aka "Chinese Whispers").

What we need is to demand higher standards for objectivity and accuracy in reporting and reward professional journalism without unnecessary political commentary. Impartial fact checking, media watchdogs that AREN'T politically motivated, etc. Be an educated consumer.

I think this all just a re-shuffling and positioning ploy.

They are gearing up and buttering up for the 2016 elections.

There will be more highly paid scapegoats soon.

Its all a crock of somebodies cayuse crap if you ask me.....
We need more facts and far less agenda driven crap.....then we can draw out own conclusions instead of having them handed out like popsicles.....only to have them melt away into agenda driven crap again...

I like coming to ATS for the news because there are many people who interpret things differently and it is nice to be able to see all sides of the story. When you watch the news on TV, you get one side, a side that is approved for our viewing.

There is a lot of twisting of the truth on MSM.

a reply to: kosmicjack

just look at how many people jump on the i hate "insert demon" bandwagon as soon as it is reported....then lo and behold a week or so later the story changes...but funny you never see those on the bandwagon changing their stance...their minds were already made up.....

News is nothing more than propaganda to suit an agenda ...what is even scarier is that people are angry and need to blame something,someone somewhere...and they have an outlet to do so

a reply to: kosmicjack

It's the same here. A growing number of citizens are mistrusting the MSM, and there are very few media outlets left that still hold good reputation.

Peer review as a self-regulatory mechanisms often works on ATS... and roughly as often fails IMO.
If ATS (or social media altogether) had their own press-council, I'd trust the info a little more.

Alas, trust is the enemy of truth in this day and age - no matter what you read. The responsible reader has to question everything.

a reply to: kosmicjack


Hillary said that they were loosing the information war and she was correct imo . Where you see the results is on MSM sites that leave the comment section open .Information that can only be found outside MSM and contradict the story line of the piece can be found sometimes with links to the web . TPTB have lost the tight grip they once had pre-911 but post-911 is a new world of information .

We have become more politically intelligent as well and that only echoes what Brzezinski feared would be the greatest challenge to TPTB in the coming years .They cant shut it down ,and we know it .They have lost us and may never regain that power . ..it's all good :>)

originally posted by: Metallicus
I actually use ATS for my news. It has comprehensive coverage and any bias or error is immediately exposed by the membership. Why would I waste time on MSM outlets?

Only problem is if you get your news just from ATS or sites like it you'll learn how everything bad that ever happens anywhere is a 'false flag' and the only bad people in the world are 'them'.

Just found this .

Actually, I feel that a lot of the youth today could care less about the news. It is typically the over 30 crowd that cares. Once the youth hit that point, the traditional news will be out the window because they won't have the focus to listen to a news broadcast for as long as they typically are. They are used to very quick "blurbs" and I have found they feel like they instantly know what is going on, when in fact they are pretty far off the mark because they have not researched or heard anything outside of those "blurbs".

Sources, such as ATS, are invaluable to me since it is real people reporting from around the world. I actually think that this type of forum and world reporting by citizens is the way that news will go. If someone like YouTube or other would set up outlets for individuals to broadcast live, I think it would cut out the fake news sites pretty quickly. Of course this would mean there would have to be a cable channel set up for this to release to the masses, but ultimately, people would report not for money, but for news itself.

a reply to: kosmicjack

The days of true journalist are dead or rapidly dying, especially when it comes to MSM and the 24/7 Cable News cycle...too many of the "anchors" want to be half anchors and half celebrity. News as entertainment and not facts.

This is what happened with Brian Williams, he became more interested in the celebrity side with appearances on Letterman and the like. He was more interested in telling amusing antidotes than he was in reporting the nightly news. Hey, his choice...but you can't have both.

Example - I am sitting here having my morning coffee, changing channels between CNN, Fox and MSNBC...just trying to see what is going on in the World (ISIS, Ukraine, Obama asking for Declaration of War permission - ya know just minor things - "wink") and this is what I saw within a few minutes:

CNN - Monday premier CNN Quiz Show with CNN's Anchors playing and Anderson Cooper as the "Quiz Master" - oh what fun- not.

MSNBC - What will John Stewart Do Next? No joke, 30 minutes of discussion about a satiric comedy shows future...

FOX - Rant, Rant, More Hawk Rant...yadda, yadda yadda, RANT. Whatever...

I read the AP Breaking News online and drop by ATS for any topics I want details on.

I have no dog in the fight with regards to what does or does not happen with any television news talking head.

Meh, could care less.

IMHO, in the future, Citizen Journalism will be the only way we will get any info that is "fair and balanced" - sorry Faux News, but you asked for it.

I much prefer to get the stories from here as opposed to MSM. Here you can sometimes get first hand accounts of things that you never get with the news. Plus you don't have to put up with the thinly veiled partisan slant you get with MSM. (perhaps not so thin with Fox) I believe there will always be a need for the MSM, since it's the "easy" way to get your news. Our society is all about the easy way.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: kosmicjack


Hillary said that they were loosing the information war and she was correct imo . Where you see the results is on MSM sites that leave the comment section open .Information that can only be found outside MSM and contradict the story line of the piece can be found sometimes with links to the web . TPTB have lost the tight grip they once had pre-911 but post-911 is a new world of information .

We have become more politically intelligent as well and that only echoes what Brzezinski feared would be the greatest challenge to TPTB in the coming years .They cant shut it down ,and we know it .They have lost us and may never regain that power . ..it's all good :>)

And then people wonder why the push for Internet regulation comes down all of a sudden in the attractive-souding label of "Net Neutrality?" They want to try to control places like this under the guise of making everything fair. Enjoy it while this lasts because tomorrow, we'll be regulated out of existence under campaign finance law and regulations if TPTB get their way.

But of course, it's all about being "fair." Not about taking control of the narrative.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
the end of fake news and, in many ways, the end of real news

It is easy to see that bygone era of American news jumped the shark when I read the headline was in relation to Stewart retiring from the Daily Show and Williams being suspended from NBC Nightly News and my first thought was "I wonder which one Stelter is calling "fake news" and which one he's trying to pass off as "real news?" Though I do not share his political slant, I have to admit I've found Jon Stewart more informative and less full of horsecrap than most of the Nightly News Pez dispenser flip-top heads on the alphabet networks. The DEATH of news happened long ago, probably sometime around the passage of the Fairness Doctrine... following that, America entered an era of very one-sided version control coupled with carefully crafted statements designed to manipulate American opinion... in other words, the American nightly news has been a big-ass blog decades before the term 'weblog' was coined nearly 20 years ago.