OT: The plague of fake news is getting worse -- here's how to protect yourself

[BobPSU92]

See the link below. From the article:

"As soon as I spoke about this on television on Sunday, CNN detractors filled my inbox with messages saying that CNN is the ultimate example of "fake news."

But that's a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue. Whatever faults CNN has, news organizations small and large try very hard to report the truth."



http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/30/media/facebook-fake-news-plague/index.html

(Despite the content of this article, let's not focus on politics here.)

 

[Ranger Dan]

I share your desire to avoid specific political opinions.... This is really a problem today, fueled by the internet and specifically social media. It's really like Wikipedia these days. There is absolutely no filter to assure that what some "news outlet" is portraying as fact. While the internet is where it is the worst, I would say that print and TV news sources are just as guilty of twisting the facts to sensationalize situations as opposed to reporting the facts and letting the recipients decide for themselves. We of course know how Sara Ganim used this to build her reputation and ultimately win a pullitzer prize. Unfortunately, I really don't see any end to it... we can only hope that enough people open their eyes and realize that they shouldn't believe everything they read/see/hear.

 

[cjrugger]

So the guy at CNN is mad they are being out-sensationalized?

 

[dawgduice]

Social media has become THE news. Not sure the "genie" can ever get put back in the bottle. Then again we are not very bright.

 

[psuro]

I believe everything posted in this board. Even the stuff I know to be false.

 

[Ten Thousan Marbles]

Fake news is not the problem. People who believe it is the problem.

It really is not that hard to figure out what news is fake and what news is not, unless one isn't really trying. This ought to be especially true for anybody with a degree from a major university.

 

[nits74]

I share your desire to avoid specific political opinions.... This is really a problem today, fueled by the internet and specifically social media. It's really like Wikipedia these days. There is absolutely no filter to assure that what some "news outlet" is portraying as fact. While the internet is where it is the worst, I would say that print and TV news sources are just as guilty of twisting the facts to sensationalize situations as opposed to reporting the facts and letting the recipients decide for themselves. We of course know how Sara Ganim used this to build her reputation and ultimately win a pullitzer prize. Unfortunately, I really don't see any end to it... we can only hope that enough people open their eyes and realize that they shouldn't believe everything they read/see/hear.

Agree, Ranger. And I'm almost to the point where I'd replace the word "everything" with "anything" in your last sentence. It really is a shame, and I struggle to determine if the media is merely a reflection of society or has it been instrumental in creating the current mindset. Probably somewhere in between, but I've come to despise the media (and I consider myself to be a little left of center).

 

[Obliviax]

See the link below. From the article:

"As soon as I spoke about this on television on Sunday, CNN detractors filled my inbox with messages saying that CNN is the ultimate example of "fake news."

But that's a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue. Whatever faults CNN has, news organizations small and large try very hard to report the truth."



http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/30/media/facebook-fake-news-plague/index.html

(Despite the content of this article, let's not focus on politics here.)

Well, two prominent CNN contributors just got caught giving a particular candidate debate questions ahead of time. So if I am CNN, I'd get off my high horse.

 

[Nitt1300]

 

[TenerHallTerror]

tired of getting ripped off by get rich quick schemes??

send me $19.95 and I will show you how to avoid them!!

 

[bwifan]

Long thought... Way I see things today...

As we have seen first hand over the last 5 years, journalism is dead. Non bias news reporting is long gone. It's every man for himself now. Just for the reasons many have posted on here. People see things on the internet and automatically assume it's true. Even after being warned to not believe everything you read on the internet. Next we as a society especially the younger generation have gotten lazy. In this I mean doing any research. With news and everything else at our fingertips 24x7 on phones/computers, people don't look any further or research anything. Whatever they read first is what they believe. IMHO the ripple effect of this is less people are tuning into newsprint media as well as watching news on tv. These were the staple for our country for a very long time. Print media is in bad shape and continues to dwindle in readership. The evening news almost no one watches anymore, whether local news or world news. Blogging has taken off with online reporting which has thrown much of the old rules out the window, of non bias reporting and getting multiple sources before releasing a story. There is so much competition now it's all about being first. Forget sources or getting the facts correct. If need be they run a small retraction later. With dwindling viewership and readership, sensationalism has taken over a.k.a. click bait. All of this has led the TV staions and news print to adapt to the new rules of reporting and show their bias. It's not very hard to watch a show and know what candidate they support. Granted the news always had a small slant towards candidates but today watching show's it's like watching a infomercial for their favorite candidate. Really sad what it all has come to in my opinion. You really have to sift through the noise and garbage to find out real information. Our upcoming generation seems to breathe it all in like it's crack. No idea what this country will look like in 50 years, part of me that is hopeful and a part of me that is glad I won't be here to see it. Rant over...

 

[artsandletters]

Well, two prominent CNN contributors just got caught giving a particular candidate debate questions ahead of time. So if I am CNN, I'd get off my high horse.

Link to proof of that, please. You may have been a willing victim of exactly what the article is about. You hear what you described and you want it to be true. Possibly unreliable sources fufill your wish.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Link to proof of that, please. You may have been a willing victim of exactly what the article is about. You hear what you described and you want it to be true. Possibly unreliable sources fufill your wish.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-emai...ton-questions-before-cnn-presidential-debate/

 

[Grass]

A wise man once told me that I don't believe a 100% of what I hear and 50% of what I see with my own eyes.

 

[dawgduice]

Fake news is not the problem. People who believe it is the problem.

It really is not that hard to figure out what news is fake and what news is not, unless one isn't really trying. This ought to be especially true for anybody with a degree from a major university.

You really believe that ? Keep in mind the average IQ is 98. And "major universities" are now money making machines. Actually a degree today is about the equivalent of a HS diploma from 50 years ago.

 

[Nitt1300]

 

[artsandletters]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-emai...ton-questions-before-cnn-presidential-debate/

Denials from both Brazile and CNN so it's who do you believe.

Do you believe the dozen or so women who made sexual claims against one of the candidates? Some have contemporaneous witnesses.

Each of us has to sift through the noise and decide for ourselves. Here's where I'm at now. I decided long ago who I was going to vote for. Nothing in the media will change my mind. I've recently stopped watching news programs because all they do is get me angry.

Anything for money as long as they can get away with it. Truth is an insignificant pest.

 

[bwifan]

Denials from both Brazile and CNN so it's who do you believe.

Do you believe the dozen or so women who made sexual claims against one of the candidates? Some have contemporaneous witnesses.

Each of us has to sift through the noise and decide for ourselves. Here's where I'm at now. I decided long ago who I was going to vote for. Nothing in the media will change my mind. I've recently stopped watching news programs because all they do is get me angry.

Anything for money as long as they can get away with it. Truth is an insignificant pest.

Hmmm... Or we can just go to cnn's website where they say they cut her loose after wikileaks email showed her giving questions to the Clinton campaign and saying she will send a few more...

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/index.html

 

[Royal_Coaster]

The main problem with that being that "fake news" means "any news that provides information or opinion with which I don't agree."

Another case in point. Within minutes after news of Comey's letter to Congress being released last weekend, a major newspaper (LA Times) was reporting the issue concerned only 3 e-mails, none of them were sent by or to Hillary, they're most likely duplicates of ones the FBI has already seen, therefore it's nothing and we should all move on.

First of all, how could they possibly know that within minutes? Secondly, why would you report that if you know there's a chance you could be proven wrong (which they were)? Is it really a case that if enough of the media decide to not report on something or to say it's not relevant, then it becomes irrelevant? Who are they to decide?

Maybe it's because of all we've gone through the past 5 years, but as soon as some media outlet tells me to move on, there's nothing to see here, I get more suspicious and more angry. No matter what your political affiliations are, you should feel the same.

 

[bwifan]

The main problem with that being that "fake news" means "any news that provides information or opinion with which I don't agree."

Another case in point. Within minutes after news of Comey's letter to Congress being released last weekend, a major newspaper (LA Times) was reporting the issue concerned only 3 e-mails, none of them were sent by or to Hillary, they're most likely duplicates of ones the FBI has already seen, therefore it's nothing and we should all move on.

First of all, how could they possibly know that within minutes? Secondly, why would you report that if you know there's a chance you could be proven wrong (which they were)? Is it really a case that if enough of the media decide to not report on something or to say it's not relevant, then it becomes irrelevant? Who are they to decide?

Maybe it's because of all we've gone through the past 5 years, but as soon as some media outlet tells me to move on, there's nothing to see here, I get more suspicious and more angry. No matter what your political affiliations are, you should feel the same.

Exactly on point! Why I see media now says screw getting it right and we just need to be first to get clicks and more ad revenue. IF they even address it any retraction will be buried on page 24 in the bottom corner 1 sentence saying they were wrong....

 

[TenerHallTerror]

The main problem with that being that "fake news" means "any news that provides information or opinion with which I don't agree."

Another case in point. Within minutes after news of Comey's letter to Congress being released last weekend, a major newspaper (LA Times) was reporting the issue concerned only 3 e-mails, none of them were sent by or to Hillary, they're most likely duplicates of ones the FBI has already seen, therefore it's nothing and we should all move on.

First of all, how could they possibly know that within minutes? Secondly, why would you report that if you know there's a chance you could be proven wrong (which they were)? Is it really a case that if enough of the media decide to not report on something or to say it's not relevant, then it becomes irrelevant? Who are they to decide?

Maybe it's because of all we've gone through the past 5 years, but as soon as some media outlet tells me to move on, there's nothing to see here, I get more suspicious and more angry. No matter what your political affiliations are, you should feel the same.

to piggy back on your example, "conservative" media outlets were reporting this new information as if the FBI HAD discovered some incriminating information.

The truth was a little more nuanced.

The problem is too many people live in an echo chamber of their own choosing, and digest only the news that conforms to their pre conceived notion of the world.

I will also see "both sides" latch on to a story or allegation, then another media outlet will cite that report as fact, then the original outlet cites THAT report as confirmation.

The media outlets work as designed by the corporations that own them and profit from them. We're part of the problem as consumers of their crap.

 

[NitNE73]

Considering the changes in media with the introduction of the internet, the demise of newspapers, and the prevalence of organizations that proport to be news sources, perhaps we should take a look at libel laws and make some changes. Presently, one has to prove that a journalist purposely published something he/she knows to be false. Perhaps that should be changed so they have to prove what they publish is true, shifting the burden of proof. At the very least, perhaps they should be convicted if their subject can prove that the published information is false regardless if the author knows or not.

 

[TenerHallTerror]

Considering the changes in media with the introduction of the internet, the demise of newspapers, and the prevalence of organizations that proport to be news sources, perhaps we should take a look at libel laws and make some changes. Presently, one has to prove that a journalist purposely published something he/she knows to be false. Perhaps that should be changed so they have to prove what they publish is true, shifting the burden of proof. At the very least, perhaps they should be convicted if their subject can prove that the published information is false regardless if the author knows or not.

Bradley Bethel's coverage of the recent Raleigh News & Observer libel lawsuit loss is eye opening

 

[artsandletters]

Hmmm... Or we can just go to cnn's website where they say they cut her loose after wikileaks email showed her giving questions to the Clinton campaign and saying she will send a few more...

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/index.html

CNN said it " never gave Brazile any access to questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate."

So CNN is lying? Wasn't Brazile let go because she was too cozy with the Clinton campaign. Nothing like the distance Fox's Hannity has put between himself and Trump.

And here's my bottom line. I don't care anymore. I'll vote and they can all go to hell. I'll try not to watch or read news anymore and if that vulgar, vile blowhard by some chance wins, I'll never tune in.

The whole world is full of shit, not just here. There's little left that can be relied on or trusted and even that is fleeting.

The joke's on us.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Denials from both Brazile and CNN so it's who do you believe.

Do you believe the dozen or so women who made sexual claims against one of the candidates? Some have contemporaneous witnesses.

Each of us has to sift through the noise and decide for ourselves. Here's where I'm at now. I decided long ago who I was going to vote for. Nothing in the media will change my mind. I've recently stopped watching news programs because all they do is get me angry.

Anything for money as long as they can get away with it. Truth is an insignificant pest.

I will believe what the emails say. It's laid out there pretty clearly if you choose to see it.
Agreed with you in the rest though. It's a mess.

 

[TenerHallTerror]

I will believe what the emails say. It's laid out there pretty clearly if you goose to see it.
Agreed with you in the rest though. It's a mess.

assuming the hacked emails haven't been doctored

we've been down this road as Penn Staters, haven't we?

 

[marisa45]

The first class I am requiring my kids take when they get to college is Critical Thinking 101 and the second is the follow-up course the next semester. They already have my version of it; IMHO, thinking critically is absolutely crucial to survive in today's sensationalized society.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Right tener. So what you are left with is finding info to support your pre-determined belief. Happens in the Sandusky scandal, happens in politics all the time.

 

[TenerHallTerror]

Right tener. So what you are left with is finding info to support your pre-determined belief. Happens in the Sandusky scandal, happens in politics all the time.

my only pre-determined belief is that everyone should get the f**k out of my way.

other than that, my beliefs are fungible.

my point was we can pick and chose what we accept as "facts" all day long

hell, Mike McQueary was the only person at his trial to say he notified people of a sex act, clearly had a self interest to testify as such, and convinced a jury it was true.

I never underestimate the average person's ability to eat a sh*t sammich and call it filet mignon.

 

[TenerHallTerror]

PS we know that Freeh likely doctored some emails. he also presented them out of context and out of sequence, and omitted any that didn't fit his pre-conceived narrative. all for a cool $8.5 million, and mouth breathers across the globe fell for it.

I don't know why we should treated hacked emails as if they were gospel.

 

[bwifan]

CNN said it " never gave Brazile any access to questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate."

So CNN is lying? Wasn't Brazile let go because she was too cozy with the Clinton campaign. Nothing like the distance Fox's Hannity has put between himself and Trump.

And here's my bottom line. I don't care anymore. I'll vote and they can all go to hell. I'll try not to watch or read news anymore and if that vulgar, vile blowhard by some chance wins, I'll never tune in.

The whole world is full of shit, not just here. There's little left that can be relied on or trusted and even that is fleeting.

The joke's on us.

Of course the joke's on us... we all believe we have an actual say in our country. No CNN is not lying just spinning their words, come on now you can't see this.... Of course they never gave Brazile access to questions but Brazile gave CNN what questions she thought should be asked in the debate. Pretty well laid out in the emails and the moderator asks the question. No conspiracy theory here, as you have said the joke's on all of us. Kinda sad where we seem to be headed as country and all this anger within so many....

 

[bwifan]

PS we know that Freeh likely doctored some emails. he also presented them out of context and out of sequence, and omitted any that didn't fit his pre-conceived narrative. all for a cool $8.5 million, and mouth breathers across the globe fell for it.

I don't know why we should treated hacked emails as if they were gospel.

Before this gets too political this will be my last post. I have a feeling this thread is bound for the test board shortly. The democrats had no problem quoting/using wikileaks as the gospel when it fit their narrative. Now the shoe's on the other foot and they don't like it so much... (I am a independent voter with no dogs in the race of democrat vs. republican btw)

 

[jjsocrates]

I don't know why we should treated hacked emails as if they were gospel.

Meet The Guy Who’s Trolling Donald Trump Supporters With Ridiculously Fake Wikileaks Emails

 

[TenerHallTerror]

Before this gets too political this will be my last post. I have a feeling this thread is bound for the test board shortly. The democrats had no problem quoting/using wikileaks as the gospel when it fit their narrative. Now the shoe's on the other foot and they don't like it so much... (I am a independent voter with no dogs in the race of democrat vs. republican btw)

and you know it works both ways. Wikileaks was a national security threat not too long ago because of Snowden and Manning.

I think we agree with the base problem. and I'm getting high and voting Aleppo for President.

 

[artsandletters]

I will believe what the emails say. It's laid out there pretty clearly if you choose to see it.
Agreed with you in the rest though. It's a mess.

And how is the hacking of the DNC and Podesta's emails not equivalent to cyber burglary? Aren't these emails being published by wiki leaks as a result of a crime? Isn't a hard drive a filing cabinet? Getting too political so I'll stop there.

 

[Obliviax]

Link to proof of that, please. You may have been a willing victim of exactly what the article is about. You hear what you described and you want it to be true. Possibly unreliable sources fufill your wish.

Brazile was fired today. Connect the dots.

 

[Obliviax]

And how is the hacking of the DNC and Podesta's emails not equivalent to cyber burglary? Aren't these emails being published by wiki leaks as a result of a crime? Isn't a hard drive a filing cabinet? Getting too political so I'll stop there.

Yes, they were hacked and it is cyber burglary. yes, it is a filing cabinet. And yes, if the hackers are caught, they should be prosecuted. But that has nothing to do with the content or authenticity of the data. At the same time, deleting emails that belong to the gov (anything on govt business) is also a crime. Especially after being subpoenaed, which would then be obstruction of justice.

 

[artsandletters]

Brazile was fired today. Connect the dots.

Ten or so women independently said that a certain candidate sexually abused them or made inappropriate sexual advances at them. One woman accused the same person of raping her when she was 13. Should I connect the dots? Is this a smoke and fire situation?

Enough already with all this slop. Let's vote and be done with it.

 

[artsandletters]

Yes, they were hacked and it is cyber burglary. yes, it is a filing cabinet. And yes, if the hackers are caught, they should be prosecuted. But that has nothing to do with the content or authenticity of the data. At the same time, deleting emails that belong to the gov (anything on govt business) is also a crime. Especially after being subpoenaed, which would then be obstruction of justice.

Of course it has to do with the content and authenticity. Louis Freeh knows how to manipulate emails, why not the hackers.

Obli, I'm done with all this. I'm just gonna vote. This whole thing has been an absolute disgrace no matter where you look. Lying, cheating, stealing, false accusations, slander, libel -- a complete and utter disgrace across the board.

 

[Psychedelic_MackDaddy]

See the link below. From the article:

"As soon as I spoke about this on television on Sunday, CNN detractors filled my inbox with messages saying that CNN is the ultimate example of "fake news."

But that's a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue. Whatever faults CNN has, news organizations small and large try very hard to report the truth."



http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/30/media/facebook-fake-news-plague/index.html

(Despite the content of this article, let's not focus on politics here.)

HOLY CRAP! President Lincoln said this would happen.