Washington Post Appends "Russian Propaganda Fake News" Story, Admits It May Be Fake

In the latest example why the "mainstream media" is facing a historic crisis of confidence among its readership, facing unprecedented blowback following Craig Timberg November 24 Washington Post story "Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say", on Wednesday a lengthy editor's note appeared on top of the original article in which the editor not only distances the WaPo from the "experts" quoted in the original article whose "work" served as the basis for the entire article (and which became the most read WaPo story the day it was published) but also admits the Post could not "vouch for the validity of PropOrNot's finding regarding any individual media outlet", in effect admitting the entire story may have been, drumroll "fake news" and conceding the Bezos-owned publication may have engaged in defamation by smearing numerous websites - Zero Hedge included - with patently false and unsubstantiated allegations.

It was the closest the Washington Post would come to formally retracting the story, which has now been thoroughly discredited not only by outside commentators, but by its own editor.

The apended note in question:


Editor’s Note: The Washington Post on Nov. 24 published a story on the work of four sets of researchers who have examined what they say are Russian propaganda efforts to undermine American democracy and interests. One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions. The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so. Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list.

www.zerohedge.com...

This was a huge story that even managed to snooker many here at ATS.

Just more fake news about fake news from the fake news...

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance

Just more fake news about fake news from the fake news...

Couldn't have said it better!

CNN was also called out, www.abovetopsecret.com... they left an editors note yesterday

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

I am both delighted and confused about this.

I am delighted to have seen WaPo calling themselves themselves out as pushers of the 'fake news.'

But I am confused because I did not think that what just happened was even possible within the MSM community.

Perhaps the word I am looking for is quizzical. Yes, I am feeling quizzical about this right now.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Who do we turn to now for Real News?

WHO?

gee thanks washington post.

our mods and members nearly busted a gasket over this one.

psyops

a reply to: Swills

Who do we turn to now for Real News?

WHO?

Better judgment, skepticism and critical thinking while we sample all types.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yeah okay, so take in all forms of news outlets and then use my brain?

Looks like the MSM is trying hard to get people to think they are all-of-a-sudden pillars of journalism.

Of course this is after they have been exposed 1000 times already and never responded.

It's another MSM trick.

a reply to: Swills

You asked I answered. The problem isn't us though, it's everyone else. People are easily swayed by sh## printed or on TV. And it goes both ways.

I thought it was already figured they were fake themselves. Oh, wait, that was propaganda from WL, etc! Basically, too late, damage is done by believing they were anything better. Gotta go back to sifting through and waiting for more details with every news source, whether it be MSM, Alt news or other.

a reply to: Swills

Thats pretty much what I have been doing the entire way through my adulthood.

Its the only way to ensure I am aware of which strings are being pulled, and by whose fingers, or at least able to make reasonable assumptions given the cause and effect involved.

Every so-called 'News' outlet, whether it is paper based, or TV ought to lose it's right to broadcast if it is found to be deliberately peddling fake news for political or financial reasons.

We're about to see US politics cleaned and swept with a broad brush..the same should happen to the absolutely stunningly bad 'main stream media' too.

If they won't clean themselves up and get back to honest, reputable and relevant news journalism, then regulate the hell out of them, impose hefty fines and sanctions until they do, and if they still won't, arrest the boards, the rest will soon fall into line.

Perhaps they could politely ask Julian Assange what it means to be a good journalist.

I think the Washington Post are now backing away from their stupid claims as they have been sued by one of the sites they listed. I am sure that all the sites they listed could end up suing them and costing them millions. Hopefully that will be the case and the fake rag Washington Post will go out of business.

As for ProporNot, they are a complete joke. I looked at their list and their example articles. One only has to do that to know they have nothing of substance, so in fact they are just pushing a political view and calling their conclusions fact. In other words they are a fake news outlet.

a reply to: Swills

um....how about YOURSELF? you know....you have a brain...and at least a modicum of critical thinking ability i am sure....so use it.


what is news? its just a bunch of people reporting something through their eyes or camera lenses all produced with a slick looking presentation with fancy graphics, suits and ties and dresses with good looking, well spoken and rehearsed readers and given the stamp of establishment approval ready for immediate consumption by a captive audience.


news is ultimately just information....thats all.....and every person individually has the right to decide whether they want to believe it or not. This right is sacrosanct.....dont eff with it if you know whats good for you (thats to the purveyors).

a reply to: MysterX

uh no, i dont want them to clean up...i want them to go away for good. Its time for real people to step up and fill the need for real reporting with all the clumsiness that goes along with it. If i want a robot reading off a teleprompter im pretty sure we will have them soon enough. But if i want a person, a human being who has the capacity to have empathy and show emotion then thats what i should get. People want AUTHENTICITY and feeling.....you know....those radical qualities that make human beings different from robots.

a reply to: tribal

I agree up to a point.

'Public reporters' are a good thing for sure, but established news agencies (and i use the word 'news' loosely these days) are supposed to be regulated and ought to be held to a high standard of accuracy, non-partisanship and honesty...i can hear the laughing already, but i do say 'ought to be', not actually are.

This is a failing of regulators of course, who are obviously not fulfilling their remit adequately, which need to be looked at.

I agree the Internet has given rise to the advent of 'people / public reporters, which is a very good thing indeed, as it offers immediate, often much faster then the MSM, on the spot reporting of events and happening or potential happenings, but it is unregulated and so cannot be held to the (supposed) high standards of accuracy and honesty as established or organised MSM ought to be.

I'm not in favour of regulating people reporters in any way, that would curtail freedoms a step too far for my tastes, but making it clear, especially to the gullible among us, that such news ought to be consumed with active mental and common sense filters firmly in place.

I know the same is obviously true for the spew that comes out of most MSM agencies, but the difference is still a regulatory one, that CAN (although doesn't seem to be) be enforced to force the MSM to toe the honesty and accuracy line.

I'm very much in favour of very economically damaging punitive financial penalties for MSM networks and agencies, found to be deliberately or negligently reporting what is essentially Political bias, and out and out lies.

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Right now ATS is a self-vetting news source. No one gets away with fake news here. My main concern is ATS does censor some important topics like Sandy Hook and Pizzagare.

Hopefully ATS will continue to limit censorship and be the unbiased news source I believe it to be.

Can we do a Washington post mortem?
Ok, I'll see myself out...

Long live fake news!!!

-Chris

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Perfect.
I was waiting for this day.

This is WaPo-gate.

And it will be bigger than the Watergate.
The Washington Post will be exposed worldwide as a low level, shameful tabloid,
and as a propagator of FAKE NEWS.

and I encourage every member of ATS to start a lawsuit against the Washington Post for defamation, asking $20 million compensation, as I will do.

HF