Answer this question honestly, and i don't know how you can deny there is fake news....

How many times has a negative article focusing on conservatives/republicans had to be corrected or retracted?

Now, how many times has a negative article focusing on liberals/democrats had to be corrected or retracted?

NYT seems to have one every other day
the new yorker, WOPO, check and check

When was the last time Fox News had one? The football players praying that the said were kneeling for the anthem, is the last one i can recall and before that, IDK.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Both sides do this.

But you have a point.

The left, for having more MSM outlets, gets caught more than the right.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Adults use the word propaganda.

And EVERY media outlet that has EVER existed uses it .

There are no exceptions.

From what I can tell, news outlets will just straight up make things up even when they have facts. I personally watched this happen. I've mentioned the story on here before. But, a friend of mine made a fishing video that got picked up by a few news outlets. All of them just straight up lied about not only what was actually in the video, even though you could see the things they were saying were different than what was in the video, but also about every piece of information about the video. Not one of the news stories about this matched any of the others. About the only thing they got right was my friend's name. My friend even wrote a small, I guess, press release with all the details to go with it that was given along with the license to the video.

The way I see it, if several different news outlets just completely fabricate something as simple and non polarizing as info about a fishing video then everything on the news should really be taken with a huge #ing chunk of salt.

I can't find it any more, but I read a great article a while back about how to get anything you want on the news, complete with an example of the author getting made up bull# on a few news sites.

In school, we were taught how to talk to the press. They warned us not to say anything that wasn't specifically on our press release, literally word for word, otherwise they would take anything we said and spin it. Even the press release wording had to be carefully chosen so nothing could be taken out of context.

Also, any science news articles should be verified by reading the actual paper. I've read more than a few news stories on things where the story being reported ended up misrepresenting the results and a few that actually reported the entire opposite results given in the paper.

I don't know if there ever really was real news but if there was it hasn't existed for a long time. These days it's basically entertainment for people who like to get angry at the world.

Especially since America started allowing propaganda to be used on their citizens back in 2012

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time"
Abraham Lincoln

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
How many times has a negative article focusing on conservatives/republicans had to be corrected or retracted?

Now, how many times has a negative article focusing on liberals/democrats had to be corrected or retracted?

NYT seems to have one every other day
the new yorker, WOPO, check and check

When was the last time Fox News had one? The football players praying that the said were kneeling for the anthem, is the last one i can recall and before that, IDK.

The thing that bothers me is how liberal media rarely corrects the record their stories often continue on in infamy even though they have been thoroughly debunked...

For example, the whole Michael Brown, hands up don't shoot BS. I still see articles featuring his mother or father and nary a mention about how the entire thing was a sham.

Trayvon Martin... same thing.

Wage Gap... same thing. Debunked multiple times... However, they still routinely run stories about a wage gap.

Etc, etc,

a reply to: SocratesJohnson



Hi Sockie-

This 'may' just cut to the chase for You. The links clearly shows ALL the media reading along a script.
The other links are re: an Executive Order signed by 44 on Sept. 15, 2015.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

foreignpolicy.com...

obamawhitehouse.archives.gov...


Basically "PsyOps" are 'lawful'... So the real question is:

Which one is Joey Goebels reincarnated?

no offence OP, but this is a pointless excersize. Both Fox news, and all the left wing media do this, who does it more is irrelevant. They have all done this to the point nobody with any sense believes them based just on their word and their anonymous sources. See the proof and evaluate it on your own.

there being alowed to do this propaganda is legal for this exact thing so we cant do anything about it

there was a time where if the news intentionaly lied it would be a big deal and may spell the end of them nowdays they could tell us nukes are coming with the panic and chaos and still get away with it

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
How many times has a negative article focusing on conservatives/republicans had to be corrected or retracted?

Now, how many times has a negative article focusing on liberals/democrats had to be corrected or retracted?

NYT seems to have one every other day
the new yorker, WOPO, check and check

When was the last time Fox News had one? The football players praying that the said were kneeling for the anthem, is the last one i can recall and before that, IDK.

And how divided has that made this country? This whole two tribe only system?

Good point, both sides do it. A lot. One reason I hate the news and tell people not to watch it. It doesn't matter if you are liberal or conservative, you are going to get brainwashed by watching and listening to propaganda.

You see it brought up a lot here, that there are way more main stream liberal news sources. But that doesn't matter. Because....

Liberals are going to watch liberal news sources and Conservatives are going to watch conservative news sources.

Smart people watch neither. And they also don't listen to talk radio, including sports radio.

Turn it all off and free your mind. I'm just as informed as you guys. I read some articles every morning, I come here, generally a couple of hours a week.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson
OK, i'm open to that idea
but .. 'duhh' question: how do we quantify 'bias' and and "fake or non-fake news"
Every news or infor.. site will be biased
It will cater to it's own particular microcosm of the internetzz

Hypothetical
I'm sure that on babeswithgunsdotcom
they may have a page devoted to news
How would they deal with today's news ?

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

They both do it - heres an idea, get some data and help make ATS Great again before putting pen to paper.

Fake news has been happening for a long time. It seems that the Liberals or Democrat supporting news is taking the fake to unseen levels, not for the good of the people but for gain of the party. It was not this bad even ten years ago. Republican supporting news sources are not nearly as bad as the Democrat supporting news sources when dealing with politics. Remember, politics is only a small part of the fake news. But if they blow up flood damage, it does not try to alter our perception to vote a certain way. They have taken off the gloves now with fake news, it is unbelievable that the majority of people cannot see they are being manipulated by these news agencies.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Adults use the word propaganda.

And EVERY media outlet that has EVER existed uses it .

There are no exceptions.

Propaganda doesn't have to be a lie. The problem is when its the lie part of the equation its in bold upper case letters blasted across the page. When its a correction or retraction its some tiny print somewhere mixed in with a dozen other three line tid bits.

If the corrections had to match the lies in scope and measure there would probably be a sharp decrease almost immediately. If the admission of lies was as sensational as the lie itself things would be very different.

Then factor in "confirmation bias" and it is a recipe for 'distraction'

again....


Par for this here course....