The FAKE news machine
 

http://money.cnn.com/interactive/med...cedonia-story/

This is an interesting article about a guy literally making a living drumming up FAKE news stories.

Ironic given the side that screams of "fake news" more often come from.

If this "fake news" crap was little more than stupid tabloid type nonsense, I wouldn't care all that much. Have at it. But purposely using, abusing, and trying to screw with a country's elections and political well being, for your own favor or simple profit, should be an offense that they have total right to go after you for.

Too bad Macedonia, or at least the Veles part of it, is probably such a small nothing of a place that the same can't be thrown back at them.


Rich off of Americans' stupidity. They're raking it in and buying expensive cars, while we'll be here paying for a wall that won't really do any good. Good job, America. You can't get yourself better income, and even fight against increases in pay, and these guys in a broke, nothing town half around the world are buying Mercedes.



Although this article coming from CNN... how do those who yell "fake news" about them handle such "fake news" about "fake news"? :lol: Does it deepen the depth of the fakeness? Does one cancel the other out? What if it's pro the guy they support?

Political propaganda is not a new thing. How about no more political advertising period. Let people go to candidates official websites and read official policy positions.

I think that's actually a really, really good idea.

Andrew could you not have picked another source besides CNN?? :lol: They just had to let go of a dozen employees for a fake story they were publishing :lol:
This is the definition of Irony.

But yes it would be nice if the Mud-slinging would stop and news channel stick with ethical practices.
But if we do not allow political advertising then I think even less people would turn out for voting which is pathetic as is.

If political advertising needs to stay for voter turn out then have only official ads allowed. So all ads can be tracked back to the campaign easily. Make the amount of ads limited but also free. No financial incentive for Networks or Facebook to sell several ads without checking sources. No financial incentive for people to create fake stories.

It's sad that presidential campaigns need to be hyped like sporting events in order to gain interest. We could just skip the paid ads and still inform people with official policy updates sent through the mail as well.

The debate format needs reform too. Like maybe all proceeds go to charity or paying down the national debt. Take the profit incentive away from the Networks. Networks make unbelievably profits during the political season and their employees get caught in the middle. Careers are made and broken.

All news is fake news.

lol, I didn't know CNN was working on an autobiography.

https://grrrgraphics.com/wp-content/...n-1024x793.jpg

Considering one of our most hallowed founding fathers started the New York Post just so he could shitpost about people in government he didn't like, I think it's fair to say that bias in journalism isn't anything new.

And we combat that by requiring our news sources to be vetted and peer-reviewed. Not by dismissing things we don't like to hear as fake news, which is apparently Newspeak for lies and falsehoods.

The only news I have trouble listening too is Washington Post, half of the time it seems like to be spreading rumors about Trump till confirmed other wise. It's not like that Russia stories will help us any ways, Republican Party seems pretty dead seat on keeping him in office no matter what happens. Even him double crossing them ( Which I actually applause him for ) To help Texas, not even a fan of Trump but that says a lot about there standards. Wonder what would have happened to Nixon had he had the watergate scandal happened during this time? Would they have had the nerve to stand up to him and impeach him?

For these news organizations, they don't seem to feel that they need any introspection in understanding a difference between hearing news the others don't want to hear versus a news organization boasting of being "the most trusted" news while using extortion, using hearsay as support for their political accusations, and have persistent inaccurate insights from supposedly "credible" pundits all to support a predetermined narrative.

OH!
You don't know the difference between journalists and pundits.
It all makes sense now!

I think everyone can agree Ron Burgundy is the greatest journalist of our time and a true legend.

i stand corrected

https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net...cretorigin.jpg

Two Pulitzer Prizewinner right here.

I just find it astounding that since Trump has taken office, the media has had the most bias with him than with anyone else. Look at the sh*t Obama did during his term and nobody ever questioned him on anything. But here's Trump and they want to scrutinize everything he does and everything he says. It's like they have nothing better to do than to obsess over him.

But my guy is a five-time (local) Emmy award-winning journalist. Not to mention the Ron Burgundy School of Communication. Which is a school in Boston named after him. :)

This is astoundingly incorrect.
But a fabulous troll.

I would give it a 9/10.

Fox News tried calling him out a lot and Obama actually criticized them for it while MSNBC and CNN were on his side.