|
'Fake News' is a manufactured scapegoat. The problem isn't that the corporate media was pushing a false narrative they wanted to come true, no it's just that the stupid idiots of our country couldn't hear it over that drat Facebook. The problem isn't that third way democrats have done nothing to help the working class and the recession never really went away for a large portion of the country, it's the false article saying that Obama wants to ban the pledge of allegiance that allowed Trump to steal those people away. The problem isn't that what's left of our manufacturing jobs are leaving the country and there's no real alternative for what we're losing, it's just that dumb (soon to be unemployed) union worker doesn't know that more manufacturing jobs were created under Obama since the 1990s and we have to prepare for the jobs of the future when they come (arrival date: TBD) People aren't going to believe Nobel laureate Paul Krugman when he shreds his credibility by saying that Trump is a puppet installed by the Kremlin. People aren't going to believe President Of The United States (and strangely enough, Nobel laureate) Barack Obama when he says things are getting better when they can clearly see that they aren't. People aren't going to believe the prestigious media outlets when they say that Hillary Clinton is a great progressive when there's decades worth of information saying otherwise. If you want to neuter the power of 'fake news', you don't ghettoize it, you have to regain your own credibility. That means journalists have to behave like journalists instead of pundits. That means politicians actually have to do the things they say they're going to do for a decent amount of time. That means corporate owners of publications have to stop using their platforms like a pulpit. (And yeah, stupid people sharing 'Dearborne is under sharia law' or 'fema is building death camps' articles isn't good but that has always taken place in various forms. It just wasn't as noticeable. Somebody would pass on some stupid thing they heard to their friend and their friend would tell their limited number of friends. Or somebody would FWD: some chain letter they got. Now, everything's connected and public for the world to see. It's one of those things regarding the internet where you have to take the bad with the good. You'll never win by ghettoizing things because the second Facebook starts flagging links as false, that's when people will start to think that Facebook is bias against conservatives and can't be trusted. 'Maybe there's some truth to this since they don't want me to see it' That's a real thing a lot of people believe.)
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 03:43 |
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:I was thinking about buying a subscription to the Washington Post to try and support real journalism, but lol at that fake "Russian propaganda" story that they published. Give  to Democracy Now. There's news sites out there doing good journalism, they just aren't the 'established and well-recognized news organizations'
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Your position is that media literacy is either pointless or impossible because people can just fake good journalism. I'm telling you that isn't possible. As your hypothetical demonstrates, you don't have enough media experience to understand that. The official position of organizations like the Associated Press is that vaccines are safe and effective and global warming is real. They didn't start at these conclusions and work backwards. The basics of research and investigation that make for good reporting led them to it. That's my point. There is no situation of "good journalism disguising false facts" because good journalism will, very quickly, turn up that those facts are false. Teaching people to recognize the difference between good and bad journalism allows them to better evaluate the news and recognize when a news organization - or fake news organization - is failing at it. I think what he's trying to say is that an established organization can potentially discredit themselves in certain circles by overstepping their bounds while a fake news site can come up with an endless amount of false sources that the average person can't navigate while being presented in a fashion that matches 'legitimate' sources (see: infowars' extremely high production value) So it's less of media literacy = bad and more like it's a deep dark grey area that most people can't handle. We all understand that the Cato Institute is a bullshit source of information but when it's 'findings' are being presented generations away from the source, that's more difficult.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
Killer-of-Lawyers posted:That's just a conspiracy thinking. Really, the government is watching and makes the news break to some pop culture story? You honestly believe that's what happened? That literally happens for movie productions that want to take advantage of US military resources. https://www.shorescripts.com/pentagon/ I haven't seen the clip of skooma512 is talking about from John Oliver or RT's call out so I'm not trying to compare the two. But it's not crazy conspiracy thinking to think that certain places self-censor themselves. Even the wikileaks podesta emails showed they had a group of friendly reporters they could reach out to that would set in motion the narrative they wanted. https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09/exclusive-new-email-leak-reveals-clinton-campaigns-cozy-press-relationship/ Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 05:11 on Dec 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
We already covered this in the left wing media thread but here's a great article that shows how flimsy the washington post article is = http://fortune.com/2016/11/25/russian-fake-news/ Fortune posted:One of the themes that has emerged during the controversy over “fake news” and its role in the election of Donald Trump is the idea that Russian agents of various kinds helped hack the process by fueling this barrage of false news. But is that really true? here's an article from counterpunch (one of the leftist sites that made the list) that shows how absurd propornot is = http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/12/02/counterpunch-as-russian-propagandists-the-washington-posts-shallow-smear/ The Washington Post was the only publication that bit when propornot was trying to shop it around to various groups. So WaPo is garbage tier news. And this shouldn't have to be stated but I guess this is the world we live in. counterpunch posted:For the record, neither Jeffrey or I have never appeared on RT or Sputnik, we’ve both turned down dozens of requests, in part because we are opposed to state-run media. In fact, both of us have been highly critical of Putin and Russia over the years and we don’t plan on curbing our critiques anytime soon. Additionally, we have gladly published a variety of Russian writers, such as Boris Kagarlitsky, many of whom are harsh critics of the regime. Even so, we don’t believe any American journalists who have appeared on these Russian-sponsored outlets should apologize for anything, and it certainly doesn’t mean those who have are Russian propagandists. Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 08:57 on Dec 5, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2016 08:48
|
|