So I Started Building A 'Fake News' List

a reply to: Christosterone

Thanks! As much as I disagree with many of you often, I've done a little posting on forums where the membership was comprised of ideologically likeminded people and it was boring — really boring. I'd rather argue with ATSers than agree with posters on other forums.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Most of Daily Kos is community blogging. It's a lot like forum posting here if you think of the OP as a "blog post" and the responses as the comment section. Posts are starred which is analogous to flagging here and comments are liked which is equivalent to ATS's stars.

I see fakenewschecker is using PropOrNot as on of its "reputable sources." Part of what inspired me to start something of my own was how horrible PropOrNot was. I also notice fakenewschecker lists ATS:

Distribution: Website Website: www.abovetopsecret.com
Bias: conspiratorial political

Above Top Secret publishes information that cannot be validated and that is anti scientific fact. The information provided should be regarded as speculative opinion or propaganda and cannot be substantiated by fact or evidence. It is among the most untrustworthy sources in the media.

Forums are places where people discuss things, I don't believe it's at all appropriate to label them "fake news."

Dissecting disinformation are you? Good look with that, it will only take a life time.
You seem to have all the time in the world for this sight though lately, so keep going.

I realized a long time ago, it's all fake news, all of it, the msn that is. Sure facts happen, but what you get to hear about
is a story, and story's can be spun into tall tales everyone should be wary of. There's still a few proper investigative journalists out there though, so consider those sources when unpicking the web of spin in the msm.

a reply to: DBCowboy

FINALLY...one completely unbiased and apolitical central authority selectively defining what news is FAKE or NOT FAKE.

I think everyone can rest easy now.

a reply to: IAMTAT

My whole issue with this is that information will be filtered by people with ideological agendas.

Free speech is dead.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

It wouldn't be a bad idea for somebody to compile a list of independent media outlets that are reliable.

a reply to: Konduit

Give me a few suggestions?

Far more concerning is what the major media outlets are currently doing. Just the latest example.

The uncovered pedo ring in Norway.

Story completely scrubbed by ABC, Wash Post and NYT after printing it.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: theantediluvian

That's good work. These sites should be exposed for peddling nonsense and click baiting. Your list is a good reference in that regard.

I think we'd all rather that the public work it out for themselves instead of whining to corporations or worse, demanding that governments "do something." I know I would.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Snopes, Politifact, and Factcheck. I've found fake news at all three.

Alex Jones is missing, Breitbart too.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Conservative sites are fake!
Got it...

You're assuming that the sites are conservative. Did you watch the interview with the guy behind Denver Guardian? Voted for Hillary (according to him).

If I told you that this was a list of sites operated by folks from the left who were trying to discredit, embarrass and disinform conservatives, would you be so reflexively flippant?

a reply to: DerBeobachter

Agree, they are both full of disinfo.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Noted.

I don't see Media Matters on the list.
An oversight?

As long as it makes you feel special. Your Post Matters.
a reply to: theantediluvian

originally posted by: RickinVa
Invalid list....


CNN is blatantly missing.

His list is a FAKE LIST. Every journalist that was in cahoots with the Clinton campaign is the real list.

All news is fake news.

Unless, it lines up with what I believe.

Then it's gospel.

I spent the entire Summer pointing out fake news to FB friends.

It's completely out of control.

S&F

a reply to: TinfoilTP

There shouldn't be any list.

Creating any list that exemplifies any ideology is wrong.

It should be up to the individual to discern whatever information is relevant.

a reply to: DerBeobachter

I avoided larger/more well known outlets in this list. Also, from the twelve stories I considered when making the list this afternoon, Breitbart didn't repeat the claims made in any of them (at least that I found in the first dozen pages or so of results). Infowars/Prison Planet did but where I looked, it was in the form of a question, e.g. "Did Hillary wear an ear piece at the CIC forum?" Again, that's from what I read through myself today.

In general, for the purposes of ATS, my thinking is that we're all familiar with Infowars and Breitbart and I wanted to focus specifically on the lesser discussed.

Lesser known...such as FOX?