Sudden Increase In "Satirical" News Stories - Goal Is To Create Confusion

Has anyone noticed the sudden occurrence of "Satirical" news stories recently?

Healthcare.gov Accidently Places People on Registered Sex Offenders List

Obama Proposes New Constitution

Those are just 2 very recent examples of stories that went viral on the web. There have been dozens recently. Until about a month ago, these were confined to sites like The Onion and a handful of other fake news sites. However, recently, these are being putting out there as though they are REAL stories. in fact, several have been published on recently established websites designed to appear like legitimate news sites. Why? I have my theories...

First, there were recent discussions in Congress on curbing Freedom of the Press and limiting Constitutionally protected Free Speech: Senate Panel OKs Measure to Define "Journalist" AND, we are also aware of Obama's ongoing desire to censor anyone who disagrees with him: Internet Freedom, A Disturbing Trend and Obama's Attempt to Delegitimize a News Organization.

Now, to the uninitiated, it would appear that the government coming to the rescue and implementing "Journalism controls" would be a good thing to prevent people from being preyed upon by fake news. But the reality isn't doesn't fit the narrative. So, Theory #1: The government is purposely planting these stories as a pretext to limit Freedom of Speech and curb internet freedom.

Next, there has been a rash of bad news regarding the Obama administration. So many, in fact, that I won't even bother linking to the stories. You know them: Obamacare misery, Benghazi, IRS Scandal, Fast and Furious Scandal, Top military brass being fired etc... So, Theory #2: The Obama Administration is flooding the net with such outrageous stories as to desensitize the masses to disregard ANY negative press on the White House or this Administration and create confusion regarding the truth.

Has anyone else noticed this recent trend? What are your thoughts?

You sure it's not Option #3? People on the internet are assholes and like screwing with their readerbase to get views and comments.

reply to post by Krazysh0t


Krazysh0t... I DID think about that as an option. However, these are too well coordinated and originating from seemingly legitimate news sites that have been fed bogus news. These bogus news stories then make their way into the main current of online news - obviously intentionally.

If this was the work of someone trying to gain attention, why all of the effort to obscure the source of the news and spread it virally? Why not take full credit if the limelight is the desired goal?

kozmo
So, Theory #2: The Obama Administration is flooding the net with such outrageous stories as to desensitize the masses to disregard ANY negative press on the White House or this Administration and create confusion regarding the truth.

Has anyone else noticed this recent trend? What are your thoughts?

I would edit Option #2 to say "Political COnservative A-Holes" are flooding the net with fake stories because in the age of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck, outrageous stories become truth all too easily. And let me be clear, I don't say that to disparage anyone elses political views.

Some of the "satire" stories out there are just satire, as The ONion has popularized. But I have no doubt that once some of those Onion stories started fooling people, it caught someone's attention. I would not be surprised if some conservative super PAC hires people to write up fake stories to distribute. I also would not be surprised if a liberal super PAC would do the same thing to disparage Republicans.

Are you thinking there might be a threat to the opinion of credibility of alternative news sites due to the sudden increase of satirical news and that it might be the start of a plot by the elite?

Seems chillingly credible, especially since I remember the surge of shills back when I was a lurker.

reply to post by usernameconspiracy


Ok, username, I'll follow your logic to its conclusion... But it leaves me with this question: WHY would any political organization write fake news stories in an attempt to scare their members into opposing their political enemies when it would obviously backfire in their faces and cost them their credibility?

I think of this as being akin to what the government has done to UFO/Alien stories - make them so outrageous, so unbelievable, that even when a legitimate story breaks it is dismissed as either "Conspiracy theory" or the rantings from a fanatical fringe element.

I've been following this trend for the past few weeks - this is new. This is NOT The Onion!

Here is another one: Wyoming School Implants RFID Chips in Students

It definitely has seemed like the amount of disinformation out there is on the rise. My wife, almost daily, is reading this crap and getting all worked up over nothing at all. My wife responds to things in a much more emotional manner than I do, and often fails to actually sit down and think about what she has read. Sadly, most news reporting anymore often glosses over or ignores facts in favor of reporting to gain an emotional response.

Look at the how the reporting on incidents this past year, starting at the end of 2012 with Sandy Hook, have been spun to cause emotional reactions from the masses... the Zimmerman trial reporting is an excellent example. Al Sharpton was given an open mike to label anyone counter to his viewpoint as a racist... never mind the fact that Zimmerman himself is a minority.

The newest spins out of the MSM now label the Tea Party movement as a terrorist group... because belief in our Constitution is counter to the administration's policy of tearing that document down so that we may be ruled by a new elite class... the new "Royal Family" with their multi-million dollar vacations and monarchy-esqu privileged lifestyle... then, when push came to shove on the budget issue the only ones that really suffered were average Americans.

The media moguls are deep in bed with this administration... acting as battered, yet faithful "partners" to their heavy handed government abusers. If Bush had ever been caught doing even a quarter of what Obama has done (IRS targetings, media wiretaps and data mining, etc) the media would have publicly crucified him... Obama, however, has greased the media wheels so damned well that he gets an immediate pass on anything while they still continue to sing his praises.

reply to post by ScottProphhit


Yes Scott, that is EXACTLY what I am saying! Fake news sites have been around forever, The Onion, National Patriot and others. But those sites were always recognized for what they were, and their material was marked as satirical. This new breed of fake news is intentionally implanted in ways that ensure that it will go viral through the online alternative press. Once it is discovered that it is fake news, it damages the credibility of the alternative media. Furthermore, it desensitizes the masses to not accept alternative news that does not square with their pre-programmed view of reality. In this way, the REAL news circulating through the alternative media is widely dismissed as "fake".

Also, as it pertains to theory #1, this gives government the appropriate pre-text to put legislative control on the media to "protect us" from being preyed upon by false news.

reply to post by kozmo


IMO the satire like the Onion give you far more real news than the MSM ever had.

Something about the satire shows me just exactly what they'd LIKE to do, and what the globalist agenda really is.

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower


That is an interesting perspective! One I had never considered... especially when you think in context with other conspiracies - like how they like to broadcast their intentions prior to the event.

tothetenthpower
reply to post by kozmo

 

IMO the satire like the Onion give you far more real news than the MSM ever had.

Something about the satire shows me just exactly what they'd LIKE to do, and what the globalist agenda really is.

~Tenth

Yes, with my previous ranting post out of the way... the Onion, Cracked and others often take a more realistic approach to the news... and some of their stories make the MSM seem blind to what is actually going on... and satire has led to real political change in the past...

Thinks S. Colbert... satire with "truthiness"...

reply to post by kozmo


Because both sides know that they need the swing vote to win, and if fake news stories can get pushed around as truth, maybe they can sway some of that swing vote with ludacris stories. It isn't my finest theory on anything, but I think I'll stand by it as a possibility.

Honestly, I like the "internet is overloaded with a-holes who spew hate" theory better than mine...

reply to post by kozmo


I can answer that question quite easily. Mainstream media outlets like to comb alternative news sites and blogs for stories that are line with their political thinking (MSNBC likes liberal ones and Foxnews likes conservative ones) then repost things that these sites have posted without doing much fact checking of their own. They do this so that the authors of these articles can get paid. Journalists who post articles online get paid by the number of comments that they receive at the bottom of their articles, which reflects the number of readers that read the article. Readers are more likely to post a comment if the content of the article is inflammatory or outlandish (people's innate desire to correct wrongs), so naturally these journalists don't care about fact checking and just repost articles of a dubious nature.

reply to post by Krazysh0t


Krazy, I had never heard that before - journalists getting paid on number of comments. I'm in the "online" business and had been led to believe that these guys get paid on "page loads", not comments.

reply to post by kozmo


Satire can work majic on the msm and especially ATS as the membership is so hip they immediately "get it" and have a big chuckle from it.

reply to post by kozmo


Can't find the article I read that in, but regardless if what you said is true, my same conclusion can be reached. Getting people to load the page can be pretty easy if your title is catchy and causes people to click on it. If the content is interesting (note: not necessarily true) to the reader, they may share it with their friends and the cycle continues.

reply to post by Krazysh0t


Oh, don't get me wrong... I'm not criticizing your info. You could be spot on and I'm dead wrong. I just stated that I had never heard that before.

Nonetheless, I don't think that has much to do with this. These are professionally produced pieces, carefully placed to ensure maximum viral affect. The original story isn't the one that moves down the line. it is re-written under multiple bylines. So I don't think the theory applies here. I could be wrong though. Thanks.

The biggest "dis-info" success came from the Obama birther lawsuits.

Mostly from Orly.

All those suits were so radical that no 'real' lawyer would even go forward.

Each case was almost *automatically* without merit.

By doing it that way, it successfully instilled the belief that Obama *HAD* to have a genuine birth certificate.

The recent 'satire' style dis info is a well planned and well timed effort.



p.s. Obama does have a 'real' birth certificate. But only in some *Legal* contexts

reply to post by xuenchen


Nice connection... never really considered that either. Maybe some of these articles are "Set up" to make the writer think they're breaking some news story only to be used to propagate disinfo?

I've seen so many of these as of late. I'm searching to link more. Maybe there is a theme or pattern?

reply to post by kozmo

I've written plenty of satirical news stories on Uncyclopedia, the most underrated satire site on the web imnho, and not one of those has been written because of someone else's "direction". Satire and news have a long history, usually during times or countries where data has to be brought to the public in a satirical way. Jonathan Swift was such a satirist, as are Colbert and Stewart, and the Smothers Brothers before them. And I may be mistaken, but hasn't Saturday Night Live had a news segment for what, 38 years now???