I think fake news is good

[GenesisNemesis]

There was literally just a coup attempt in the U.S. because of fake news but OK, sure, "fake news is good".

 

[laughing dog]

The idea of spreading differing viewpoints on the interpretation of facts is a good idea. The idea of spreading lies as good is moronic and dangerous. The world does not need more disinformation.

 

[DrZoidberg]

There was literally just a coup attempt in the U.S. because of fake news but OK, sure, "fake news is good".

I think this was the peak of it. After this I think the "wake up sheeple" - people will go back to sleep.

Do you think it will get worse than it is now?

 

[DrZoidberg]

The idea of spreading differing viewpoints on the interpretation of facts is a good idea. The idea of spreading lies as good is moronic and dangerous. The world does not need more disinformation.

I don't think we get to chose between these. I think it's a package deal. It's some good and some bad.

Whatever mechanisms we employ to kill fake news will also kill the multitude of viewpoints. Not that I think it's possible to stop it

 

[fromderinside]

There was literally just a coup attempt in the U.S. because of fake news but OK, sure, "fake news is good".

I think this was the peak of it. After this I think the "wake up sheeple" - people will go back to sleep.

Do you think it will get worse than it is now?

Does shit stink? If the society doesn't come down very hard on what just happened existing groups will be encouraged to try even harder to take charge.

 

[laughing dog]

The idea of spreading differing viewpoints on the interpretation of facts is a good idea. The idea of spreading lies as good is moronic and dangerous. The world does not need more disinformation.

I don't think we get to chose between these. I think it's a package deal. It's some good and some bad.

There is a big difference between trying to censor to stop lies and promoting lies. Sorry, fake news has no place in a civilized society whatsoever.

Whatever mechanisms we employ to kill fake news will also kill the multitude of viewpoints. Not that I think it's possible to stop it

The way to stop fake news is better and more persistent education and civic engagement.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

There was literally just a coup attempt in the U.S. because of fake news but OK, sure, "fake news is good".

I think this was the peak of it. After this I think the "wake up sheeple" - people will go back to sleep.

Go back to sleep? What evidence do you have of that?

 

[steve_bank]

The idea of spreading differing viewpoints on the interpretation of facts is a good idea. The idea of spreading lies as good is moronic and dangerous. The world does not need more disinformation.

If watch both CNN and FX enough the question what truth means becomes obvious.


The CNN intro used to be ...the most trusted name on the globe...

Interpretation of facts is presented as truth by both sides. That is ok to a point. The problem is when it gets to the point of always interpreting to favor one side or the other. When interpretation becomes apologetics it is harmful, FOX being blatant about it.

FOX is strongly opposed to illegal immigration. CNN continualy shows tragedy at the border but never questions how policy affects people deciding to come to the border. It is how you present facts to sway opinion one way or the other.

Whenever I listen to someone on TV or radio I am thinking what is this person trying to accomplish, regardless of which side he or she is on. What does the person WANT me to think, and why.

 

[DrZoidberg]

There was literally just a coup attempt in the U.S. because of fake news but OK, sure, "fake news is good".

I think this was the peak of it. After this I think the "wake up sheeple" - people will go back to sleep.

Do you think it will get worse than it is now?

Does shit stink? If the society doesn't come down very hard on what just happened existing groups will be encouraged to try even harder to take charge.

But how is society supposed to "come down hard" on it? What's your proposed method? If your method acts to promote any single ideology, then I'm out.

 

[DrZoidberg]

There was literally just a coup attempt in the U.S. because of fake news but OK, sure, "fake news is good".

I think this was the peak of it. After this I think the "wake up sheeple" - people will go back to sleep.

Go back to sleep? What evidence do you have of that?

I don't have evidence. But I have hope.

After the French Revolution the leftist press (that times equivalent to alt right) were very loud and demanding. When Robespierre fell they grew a hell of a lot less aggressive. And at the time of the rise of the Directory a year later (and it being much the same bullshit as Robespierre) they lost their fervour. The wrote the same things, but they hadn't quite the same passion, and had a lot less pull by the public. By the time Napoleon seized power nobody had the energy to give a shit.

That's the world's first occurrence of this. And this is a pattern repeated. The Iranian revolution had the exact same pattern. People who fanatically follow a misguided cause that ultimately succeeds and is shown to be nothing but bullshit, makes it's supporters become passive and cynical.

I'm not saying the storming of the Capitol is as a momentous of an occasion as the storming of the Bastille, but there are parallels. People only have so much energy to sink into bullshit causes.

 

[steve_bank]

It is being considered momentous, but it was long in the making.

In the 90s there were assassinations of police and judges by the extreme right. Ruby Ridge.

The rifle Oswald used to kill JFK was linked to another assassination.

Thanks for the summary of the French Revolution, it is appropriate.

Over here we have a self destructive hyper sense of the individual over the group. For conservatives any limits are a slippery slope.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It is being considered momentous, but it was long in the making.

Ehe.. You can't compare them. The storming of the Bastille led to the toppling of the most powerful king in Europe and made him the bitch of the people. It redefined politics forever. It still is the most momentous event in Western history. The storming of the Capitol was just that. It had no real consequences. That was the end of it.

In the 90s there were assassinations of police and judges by the extreme right. Ruby Ridge.

The rifle Oswald used to kill JFK was linked to another assassination.

Thanks for the summary of the French Revolution, it is appropriate.

Over here we have a self destructive hyper sense of the individual over the group. For conservatives any limits are a slippery slope.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. It's just down to values and how an individuals rights are allowed to be infringed by the collective. Conservatives aren't against individuals having their rights infringed by the collective. They just think the tool by which this is done is via monetary means. Capitalists and socialists both think the collective is allowed to infringe on individual rights. Conservatives just deny they are doing it through handwaving. But it is handwaving. It's just straight up bullshit. But they have a right to have that opinion. Defending that is a hill I'm willing to die on

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Fake news

Thanks to this moon hoax, the Sun went from a struggling upstart to the most widely read newspaper in the world. Then a rival newspaper revealed that all of the Sun’s stories about life on the moon were a lie. The Sun’s rivals expected this would kill the paper. They were totally wrong.

“The Sun’s circulation never went back down,” Goodman says. “The public tipped their hats, said, ‘You did a masterful job of entertaining us,’ and didn’t turn against the Sun.”

Fake news goes back a bit and has had a resurgence. Two television "news" networks (Newsmax, OANN) exist to promote that didn't exist 15 years ago!

 

[fromderinside]

My freshman paper was on the Specie Circular and Bank of United States created and defended after Hamilton by Biddle. Misinformation was much worse then mostly because there were few reporters, almost no way to pass information faster that a horse could trot. Science wasn't a thing yet. It was there but not a thing. What we have now would have been considered remarkably fact based. Illiteracy was over60%. Fortunately only the educated voted.

 

[steve_bank]

Ummmm...we have 'reporters' today, and a lot of them? Cronkite and Morrow are long gone. They left no descendants.

 

[fromderinside]

Just by the range of reporting we encounter from media sources indicates there are very strong methods in how and what reporting is supposed to do exist. It's not hard to sort out well trained and ethical reporters from those who are there to carry the water for some issue.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Ummmm...we have 'reporters' today, and a lot of them? Cronkite and Morrow are long gone. They left no descendants.

Star reporters able to uncover huge stories seemingly out of nowhere is evidence of a greater problem of reporting. Why is there ever huge breaking stories about stuff discoverable for a long time? It's of course because there's too few reporters which was a result of distributing news was expensive. Today every human with a computer is in effect a reporter. I've reported on things on this forum which I've witnessed myself. That's why the news medium is financially collapsing today. Today the collecting of the data is free. Anybody in minutes can collect data that professional journalists used to have to spend months collecting.

The only value left in journalism is in depth analysis. Which is why that's exploded. Why long form interviews on podcasts is big. While nobody watches sound byte interviews on TV anymore to learn anything useful.

The descendants of Cronkite and Murrow are still around. They're just unemployed at the moment.

I also strongly suspect that it Cronkite and Murrow lived today we'd find plenty of factual errors in their stories. We only give them a free pass in retrospect because they couldn't have known better. They operated as best as they could from incomplete facts. Today we have the opposite problem. We have too many facts. That requires a different set of skills to navigate.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Just by the range of reporting we encounter from media sources indicates there are very strong methods in how and what reporting is supposed to do exist. It's not hard to sort out well trained and ethical reporters from those who are there to carry the water for some issue.

Is it really? I'm not challenging you. I have a feeling it should be possible. But I'm wondering what's the method. How do you do it?

 

[fromderinside]

Here's an example DrZoidberg

NYU Journalism Handbook for Students Ethics, Law and Good Practice
https://journalism.nyu.edu/about-us...tudents/nyu-journalism-handbook-for-students/

Introduction

[FONT=&quot]The credibility of individual journalists and the press itself depends in large part on a rigorous adherence to ethical practices. That starts with dedication to the pursuit of truth and integrity in everyday reporting and writing. Plagiarism, fabrication, deliberate misrepresentation of facts, and conflicts of interest violate the most basic commitment to discover and publish the truth. There are many additional ethical considerations that journalists must consider, some requiring close analysis that does not always yield easy answers. How does one deal with confidential sources and with various forms of background and off-the-record information? Under what circumstances, if any, should a journalist work undercover to collect information? How does a journalist balance newsworthiness against a person’s legitimate right to privacy? We cover these and many other issues in the guide that follows.[/FONT]

 

[steve_bank]

Just because a reporter has press credentials does not infer competence anymore than a degree in science infers science competence.

One problem is filling air time all day on 24/7 news. Reporters make any and all things into a story, and they report it as if the fate of world depended on it.

NPR does some decent analysis, but most of it I a continuing tear jerking soap opera with that goofy background music to the stories.