3 ms·

Some sites which are contain nothing but blatantly false fake news: christ wire dot org daily currant dot com (claims to be a "parody" site, but does not attemp

by treebog 10y ago

Some sites which are contain nothing but blatantly false fake news: christ wire dot org daily currant dot com (claims to be a "parody" site, but does not attempt to be funny) If you use facebook, you have probably seen these and similar sites pop up, shared by people who think they reflect real news. They exist to confuse people and score clicks in the confusion.

jwtadvice 10y ago
The parody site from this article?: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2010/09/christwire.html http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2010/09/christwire.html It absolutely is parody. I regret using Facebook for many reasons. Really poorly informed politicking and sharing of tabloids unfortunately hasn't been invented or exacerbated by Facebook. The most onerous and pernicious trading of misinformation I've seen on Facebook has been impressions originating from 'credible' sources: that Putin and Trump are best friends (Hillary Clinton and the DNC), that Saddam Hussein had some connection to 9/11 and also had nuclear weapons (George Bush, the White House Press Secretary and the US mainstream media), that there is no global assassination program, deal with Iran, that the US coalition wasn't supporting ISIS (the Obama Administration), Clinton had a 100% chance of winning this election (every reputable news source), that the South China Sea is about Chinese "aggression" (Obama Administration), there was nothing illegal and nothing interesting in Secretary of State emails and similarly in the DNC leaks (State Department and Clinton Campaign), there was no mass surveillance even indicated by the Snowden Documents (effectively all mainstream American media), the (first) fake US invasion of Fallujah (US military and New York Times), that nothing was happening in Ferguson after the State of Emergency (Federal Aviation), that China's economy was about to fall instead of giving the real news about their entering the special economic basket (HBR, The Economist, BBG + NPR), fake news about the assassination of Qaddafi [and his rape, and the US involvement in continued intentional regime change] (CNN, mainstream news reporting), the whitewashing of the genocide in Bahrain (CNN international), etc. In higher level education in the United States, they tell history studies students to completely forget everything from their K-12 education, and they start over. The reason for this is that K-12 history education looks nothing like actual recorded history, and is subject to the need for the state to educate a positive portrait of itself in order to build support among its population base. The problem with this pernicious bubble of mis- and dis-information affecting even high levels of otherwise erudite conversation is that because it's trusted-by-default source, questioning it (as it is actually prudent to do) is considered 'disruptive' and 'irresponsible' while assuming and parroting establishment narrative as somehow factual, unstrategic or unbiased is considered 'polite' while it at the same time justifies enormous human cost and tragedy. This pernicious bubble is a much larger problem than silly National Inquirer articles, as it has much greater negative effects and is much, much more populous.

by treebog 10y ago

jwtadvice 10y ago

The parody site from this article?: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2010/09/christwire.html http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2010/09/christwire.html It absolutely is parody. I regret using Facebook for many reasons. Really poorly informed politicking and sharing of tabloids unfortunately hasn't been invented or exacerbated by Facebook. The most onerous and pernicious trading of misinformation I've seen on Facebook has been impressions originating from 'credible' sources: that Putin and Trump are best friends (Hillary Clinton and the DNC), that Saddam Hussein had some connection to 9/11 and also had nuclear weapons (George Bush, the White House Press Secretary and the US mainstream media), that there is no global assassination program, deal with Iran, that the US coalition wasn't supporting ISIS (the Obama Administration), Clinton had a 100% chance of winning this election (every reputable news source), that the South China Sea is about Chinese "aggression" (Obama Administration), there was nothing illegal and nothing interesting in Secretary of State emails and similarly in the DNC leaks (State Department and Clinton Campaign), there was no mass surveillance even indicated by the Snowden Documents (effectively all mainstream American media), the (first) fake US invasion of Fallujah (US military and New York Times), that nothing was happening in Ferguson after the State of Emergency (Federal Aviation), that China's economy was about to fall instead of giving the real news about their entering the special economic basket (HBR, The Economist, BBG + NPR), fake news about the assassination of Qaddafi [and his rape, and the US involvement in continued intentional regime change] (CNN, mainstream news reporting), the whitewashing of the genocide in Bahrain (CNN international), etc. In higher level education in the United States, they tell history studies students to completely forget everything from their K-12 education, and they start over. The reason for this is that K-12 history education looks nothing like actual recorded history, and is subject to the need for the state to educate a positive portrait of itself in order to build support among its population base. The problem with this pernicious bubble of mis- and dis-information affecting even high levels of otherwise erudite conversation is that because it's trusted-by-default source, questioning it (as it is actually prudent to do) is considered 'disruptive' and 'irresponsible' while assuming and parroting establishment narrative as somehow factual, unstrategic or unbiased is considered 'polite' while it at the same time justifies enormous human cost and tragedy. This pernicious bubble is a much larger problem than silly National Inquirer articles, as it has much greater negative effects and is much, much more populous.