The Truth About What Constitutes "Fake News" for the Left Which They Want to Ban.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
I need to find another source for her list, because it seems she also listed DrugeReport as a website they want blacklisted. Need to find confirmation for this.

The listed site might be ...

DrudgeReport.com.co

a parody site.

a reply to: reldra

Google is talking about banning the ability to advertise on "fake" news sites.

a reply to: xuenchen

You might be right. Still trying to find the entire list.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Leftist authoritarians wanting to censor and end free speech and control the flow and type of information.

This is my shocked face.

The left promotes free speech. It is the right that often uses derogatory terms for the left when it is exercised.

The left promoting free speech is like a vegan promoting Jim's Steakhouse.

I don't believe you.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: reldra

Google is talking about banning the ability to advertise on "fake" news sites.

It is. They are a private business. They can do that. They are not the only service that sells advertising.

Maybe we would end up with less Niburu spam.

Here is a website that posts all 134 (so far) websites the left wants blacklisted.

www.dailydot.com...

Even TheBlaze is in the list.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Both sides are guilty of it. Both Clinton and Trump had online bots and supporting/paid shills pushing and creating fake news. Turns out, Trump had more success tho in much larger numbers.

Infowars is well known to be a doom porn hack website but ever since Alex has become a conservative and attacks liberals his fan base grew. He's a salesman looking to make money and he's not held to any standard to publish and broadcast the facts. At best, he's an entertainer who should never be a source for anything.

Breitbart is also another hack site for conservatives. You know who pours tens of millions of dollars into that site? A Wall Street Hedge Fund Billionaire, Robert Mercer and he doesn't give a crap about you, only his bottom line. He's also one of the billionaires who pushed for Citizens United and creators of one of the first Super Pacs all to make profit. So if you defend Breitbart you're defending Wall Street.

If you think only the left are guilty of this you are lying to yourself or us.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Leftist authoritarians wanting to censor and end free speech and control the flow and type of information.

This is my shocked face.

The left promotes free speech. It is the right that often uses derogatory terms for the left when it is exercised.

The left promoting free speech is like a vegan promoting Jim's Steakhouse.

I don't believe you.

I am not sure when that happened unless I have fallen into an alternative universe.

The right had a stranglehold on free speech for decades with J. Edgar Hoover.

a reply to: reldra

These targeted news sites are private businesses too.

I say let the free market weed out the fakes.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Leftist authoritarians wanting to censor and end free speech and control the flow and type of information.

This is my shocked face.

The left promotes free speech. It is the right that often uses derogatory terms for the left when it is exercised.

The left promoting free speech is like a vegan promoting Jim's Steakhouse.

I don't believe you.

I am not sure when that happened unless I have fallen into an alternative universe.

The right had a stranglehold on free speech for decades with J. Edgar Hoover.

Proof?

Or is this coming from CNN or MSNBC

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: reldra

These targeted news sites are private businesses too.

I say let the free market weed out the fakes.

The Onion clearly states they are satire. Sites that make things up out of thin air and not just for the purpose of theoreticals, should be marked in some way or be told it is their responsibility to create a better disclaimer.

There are stupid people out there that will believe, say 'Putin orders Trump to disclose Niburu or I will". There is a fake site with the wrong popular vote numbers. There are sites that state Michelle Obama is a transvestite. It is done in the form of a new article. Something should be done.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Leftist authoritarians wanting to censor and end free speech and control the flow and type of information.

This is my shocked face.

The left promotes free speech. It is the right that often uses derogatory terms for the left when it is exercised.

The left promoting free speech is like a vegan promoting Jim's Steakhouse.

I don't believe you.

I am not sure when that happened unless I have fallen into an alternative universe.

The right had a stranglehold on free speech for decades with J. Edgar Hoover.

Proof?

Or is this coming from CNN or MSNBC

How quickly people forget history.

a reply to: xuenchen

You were right, the site they mention is 115. DrudgeReport.com.co That is one of the few true fake sites in there.

a reply to: reldra

Yes.

Expose it and let the free market decide the solutions.

Micro Managing always fails long term.

a reply to: Swills

Ummm, this isn't about who is backing what so much as it is about whether or not people should be "saved" from certain sources by other people who have deemed them "fake."

Do you think other people have the right to make that choice for you?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: xuenchen

You were right, the site they mention is 115. DrudgeReport.com.co That is one of the few true fake sites in there.

But they are funny sometimes.

a reply to: reldra

You mean like CNN, and the mainstream websites who are still reporting Trump got 290 EC votes when he got 306?... Or is it just the websites "you" want to claim are fake?... After all, the day after Trump was shown as the President Elect, on November 9th you yourself created a thread in which you claim "Trump is already lying through his teeth and not keeping promises"...

Not to mention, what is the threshold for "fake" because even the most reputable news sources have been known to get it wrong: Dan Rather, Brian Williams.

originally posted by: darkbake
What happens if a website distributes fake news? They are flagged and a warning message pops up on the screen. That's all. Some people are making false news stories on purpose and publishing them. There needs to be a way to tell how reliable the information you want to get is.

In the end, an alternative website might end up distributing what could be considered fake news simply because they are willing to speculate on stuff. Someone like me likes that aspect and I am willing to go to sites that I believe are genuinely trying to promote their perspective. Warning me that some of the news on there is false is a point well taken, but I'll still go check it out.

Think of it this way: ATS already flags threads that are portraying factually false information. It is the right thing to do. ATS doesn't use this for political gain, however. That is why I disagree with letting a left-wing extremist make the list.

Therein lies a Constitutional breach . WHO gets to decide what is fake ?
Of course foreign nationals , for the most part , have no Constitutional right to free speech. I guess that part doesnt matter to most of the rest of the world

No it was drudgereport.com.co that was on the list.