Fake News

[Mike67]

The people in the MSM who are bitching the loudest about "fake news" are guilty of trying to spread fake news themselves. The MSM is just angry that people are looking at alternative news sources and that they don't trust them or listen to them any longer. It's a veiled assault on freedom of speech.

[Mike67]

most people just don't get what fake news are.

To the mainstream media fake news is political news that they disagree with. You can't stop "fake news" without sh*tting on freedom of speech.

[Mike67]

It's a good thing Paul Joseph Watson is a fair, unbiased source, not in any way associated with some conspiracy theorist's hack site.

It's not like the MSM is an unbiased source. They carried water for the Hillary Clinton Campaign the entire time and openly admitted it.

[Mike67]

at

It's a good thing Paul Joseph Watson is a fair, unbiased source, not in any way associated with some conspiracy theorist's hack site.

It's not like the MSM is an unbiased source. They carried water for the Hillary Clinton Campaign the entire time and openly admitted it.

No, they gave Trump free advertising and they mutually benefitted from it.

The Morning Joes openly admitted the the Media was all in for Hillary Clinton and they said ths was why the Media acted so angry and sad when Donald Trump won.

[Mike67]

The people in the MSM who are bitching the loudest about "fake news" are guilty of trying to spread fake news themselves. The MSM is just angry that people are looking at alternative news sources and that they don't trust them or listen to them any longer. It's a veiled assault on freedom of speech.

I have to agree. For example, the number one piece of "fake news" from 2016?

The pretense that Donald Trump was remotely competent to be president of the United States. It went virtually unremarked by the MSM, in favor of ratings-grabbing overage of his latest "outrage".

Now, just imagine what the Trump-led GOP, already hostile to the first amendment, might try to do in the name of a War Against Bad News.

The MSM and the Democrats want to sh*t on the first amendment and freedom of speech by shutting down "fake news" websites and radio talk shows. It's not going to work and it's going to backfire.

[Mike67]

most people just don't get what fake news are.

To the mainstream media fake news is political news that they disagree with. You can't stop "fake news" without sh*tting on freedom of speech.

pizza-gate is fake news and all similar news are fake too.

and more important than "fake news" are "fake news sources".

if a major newspaper makes a mistake it corrects itself or you find another take by another real newspaper.

there is no source, no correction and no responsibility for sites like infowars, prison planet, etc.....easy as that.

There is a such thing as freedom of speech and you can't shut them Infowars,Prison Planet,World Net Daily or Breitbart because you disagree with it.

[Mike67]

most people just don't get what fake news are.

To the mainstream media fake news is political news that they disagree with. You can't stop "fake news" without sh*tting on freedom of speech.

pizza-gate is fake news and all similar news are fake too.

and more important than "fake news" are "fake news sources".

if a major newspaper makes a mistake it corrects itself or you find another take by another real newspaper.

there is no source, no correction and no responsibility for sites like infowars, prison planet, etc.....easy as that.

There is a such thing as freedom of speech and you can't shut them Infowars,Prison Planet,World Net Daily or Breitbart because you disagree with it.

question: does freedom of speech apply to putting false information on food labels and the like?

Not the same thing and just because you disagree with what it said that doesn't make it false.

[Mike67]

There is a such thing as freedom of speech and you can't shut them Infowars,Prison Planet,World Net Daily or Breitbart because you disagree with it.

Of course not. But Google can de-list them and Facebook could stop putting those sites in their feeds. Both those are private companies who are free to exclude or include what they wish.

It's a good thing there are other search engines like Yahoo or DuckDuckGo for when Google makes it where you can't search for Conservative websites 

[Mike67]

It's a good thing there are other search engines like Yahoo or DuckDuckGo for when Google makes it where you can't search for Conservative websites 

I mean, others could as well. If Google/Bing delisted some of these sites, they would definitely see a marked dropped in viewers. And I'm not really talking about "conservative websites" wholesale. I don't have a problem with most conservative sites (even if I tend to disagree with their views and/or writing styles, such as news slanting)

We're on the same page that "fake news" are stories that can be proven false, right? Not just anything conservative?

The problem with that is a lot of Democrats as well as the Media label what ever story they don't like as "fake news". I think Pizzagate along with the Hillary e-mails are legitimate stories and not fake news.

[Mike67]

yes only millionaires like Peter Thiel should be able to shut down sites that displease them.

Funny how leftist will constantly say "free speech doesn't mean that you're free from social consequences of your speech" whenever a conservative is witch hunted or blacklisted for saying something.

Conservative Peter Theil imposes social consequences on the liberal Gawker site for their speech and suddenly liberals say "this is a threat to free speech!"

Gawker was trash and its loss was more amusing to me than anything else, but I somehow doubt that if George Soros and Waren Buffet funded the Pizzagate targets to go after Breitbart and Infowars in court you'd be happy.

Also jesus can we turn down the victim complex for five seconds, lol.

Say that to the Democrats as well just to be even handed

[Mike67]

Breitbart and Infowars are great. So was Gawker and the NY Times. Let a hundred flowers bloom, and a hundred schools of thought contend!

LOL the Democrats tend to be more Stalinist than Maoist(Your Mao quote   )

[Mike67]

You actually think that the US government should shut down Trump supporting news outlets like Infowars, Breitbart and the rest. I wonder if a trump adminstration shut down anti Trump news outlets like the new York Times or the Huffington Post if you wouldn't be complaining the loudest.

why does literally every reäctionary fckwit get their moral compass from dril's wise man
truly a mystery for the ages

Well I don't think that there are many people who think that HuffPo and the NYT are morally equivalent to Breitbart and Infowars. I think are plenty of people who think the former news outlets to be morally better (mostly liberals) and plenty who think the latter news outlets to be morally better (mostly conservatives). Also I'm sure there are even more who just don't know or don't have an opinion.

The point is that you'd like the government to shut down the right wing news outlets that right wingers (e.g. Breitbart, Infowars) like myself think are better but if any government shut down the left wing news outlets (e.g. HuffPo, NYT) that lefties like yourself think are better you'd probably complain wildly.

no opinion is involved. huffpo and nyt are objectively so far above breitbart and infowars in terms of factuality that they're not reasonably comparable.

The NYT and Huffington Post were not objective because they were up front with their support for Hillary Clinton.