Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A writer named Kristen Koch wrote a 1/23/2017 article called "Fake News And Higher Thinking" for The Odyssey Online, a publication-style social content web site, that brings this up this point that I am paraphrasing: unintentional fake news happened during the last Presidential election when reporters wanted to release election news while it was still hot off the figurative press. In wanting to get news out faster, there is the chance of inaccuracies or complete falsehoods. Compare to that to deliberate fake news. For this, she mentioned then-recent studies showing that Middle Eastern and Balkan teens were generating for-profit fake news. Those teens don't care about their own credibility as long as those news gets attention.
Various ABC News, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS News, Fox News, and CNN stories fall under both categories.
A writer named Kristen Koch wrote a 1/23/2017 article called "Fake News And Higher Thinking" for The Odyssey Online, a publication-style social content web site, that brings this up this point that I am paraphrasing: unintentional fake news happened during the last Presidential election when reporters wanted to release election news while it was still hot off the figurative press. In wanting to get news out faster, there is the chance of inaccuracies or complete falsehoods. Compare to that to deliberate fake news. For this, she mentioned then-recent studies showing that Middle Eastern and Balkan teens were generating for-profit fake news. Those teens don't care about their own credibility as long as those news gets attention.
A writer named Kristen Koch wrote a 1/23/2017 article called "Fake News And Higher Thinking" for The Odyssey Online, a publication-style social content web site, that brings this up this point that I am paraphrasing: unintentional fake news happened during the last Presidential election when reporters wanted to release election news while it was still hot off the figurative press. In wanting to get news out faster, there is the chance of inaccuracies or complete falsehoods. Compare to that to deliberate fake news. For this, she mentioned then-recent studies showing that Middle Eastern and Balkan teens were generating for-profit fake news. Those teens don't care about their own credibility as long as those news gets attention.
This is an extremely important distinction that is often over-looked (especially by conservatives in these C-D threads). Mistakes happen, and bias happens (e.g., giving extra attention to stories that favor a political agenda while down-playing stories that are not so helpful). But flat-out literal fake news is significantly different. In general, if a mistake is made, the news outlet will eventually apologize for the mistake. (And bias is countered by other news sources who have the opposite biases pointing out what has been ignored, so that someone who gets their info from multiple sources across the political spectrum can, in principle, get a more comprehensive overview.)
The burden of fake news is the overwhelming flood of intentionally false stories intended to sway the opinions of people who are likely to believe anything that favors their own agenda. A related goal is to swamp public debate with irrelevant clutter so that high-level, thoughtful, fact-checked debates in the public sphere are nearly impossible to maintain. The links I posted earlier are helpful for making the distinction:
The irony of the White House video involving Jim Acosta is that it shows the administration to be doing what it accuses the news media of doing—engaging in fake information.
The White House via Sanders said they don't know where the video came from. I seriously doubt they doctored it. I really can't believe people have time on their hands enough to sit and watch videos frame by frame...
The White House via Sanders said they don't know where the video came from. I seriously doubt they doctored it. I really can't believe people have time on their hands enough to sit and watch videos frame by frame...
Right, they lied again to attempt to find an excuse for their first lie. In case you haven't been paying attention for the past 2 years, that is kind of their thing.
In this video, the guy keeps saying Acosta tried to restrain the woman. No he didn’t. He pressed down with his arm to keep her from taking the mic. It wasn’t rough or an attack. People are making it out like he grabbed her forcefully. Do I think the video was doctored? No. But it doesn’t show him doing anything wrong.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.