6 ms·

You're 100% correct. Look at all the backlash they got because their human editors wouldn't put fake news into the trending topics and that fake news happened t

You're 100% correct. Look at all the backlash they got because their human editors wouldn't put fake news into the trending topics and that fake news happened to be conservative. Even look in this comment thread. You have people insisting that Breitbart is a highly reputable site (that just happens to promulgate far-right conspiracy theories) while mainstream news is supposedly "fake" because they incorrectly forecast an election.

tomp 10y ago
I was merely pointing out that "fake" is more of a propaganda, not a completely black and white issue. Or do you think it's a coincidence the "fake news" story only broke after the "non-fake" media lost the election, not before while they were still very confident they'd win?
- morgante 10y ago
  > I was merely pointing out that "fake" is more of a propaganda, not a completely black and white issue. Don't pretend that your comment history doesn't display a clear Trump bias. There might be some difficult cases at the margin, but lots of fake news is very easy to spot. No, ISIS was not founded by Clinton. No, Obama is not instituting Sharia law. No, George Soros is not hacking voting machines. > Or do you think it's a coincidence the "fake news" story only broke after the "non-fake" media lost the election, not before while they were still very confident they'd win? No, I don't think it's a coincidence. It seems very natural that new events would shine an event on existing trends. Or perhaps do you think that Islamic terrorism only began on 9/11, or that mortgage fraud began in 2008?
  - tomp 10y ago
    I like to think that my comment history displays mostly a contrarian (vis-a-vis mainstream) bias, although admittedly that would seem pro-Trump to most HN users (I think yummyfajitas is often the target of similar accusations).
    - morgante 10y ago
      You can "like to think that" but there's a difference between being "contrarian" and partisan. Though I might disagree with yummyfajitas on things, he at least brings data and arguments to back up his claims instead of just asserting that the MSM is obviously fake and biased.
  - candiodari 10y ago
    > No, I don't think it's a coincidence. It seems very natural that new events would shine an event on existing trends. Or perhaps do you think that Islamic terrorism only began on 9/11, or that mortgage fraud began in 2008? So instituting censorship (since you agree there is a bias in your previous paragraphs) to affect the outcome of an election is: 1) acceptable 2) you DO realize the keys to the kingdom will be handed off to Trump, Pence and Steve Bannon, right ? Really think about what you're doing here. You're mounting a bigger gun on a tank that will be driven by Trump. Do you seriously not realize who it'll be firing at ? But clearly you think things like censorship are acceptable as long as you agree with them. Hell, it seems the entire democratic establishment agrees with it. Why ? Just to not offend Hillary Clinton ? Fuck that. Trump won because he showcased the ugly side of the democratic party and Hillary Clinton in particular, quite successfully. And what is being done in response ? Dig deeper. Of course the issue MUST be that they're being shown in the wrong light by "fake" articles. Even if that actually is the issue you should still assume it's not. I would love it if this whole nonsense stopped, and some serious introspection would be done instead. How about we declare that Middle America's white supremacy fringe is about as offensive as Islam's sharia laws, that underwear toting rednecks with guns are pretty much the same thing as child-raping muslim "revolutionaries", and should be ignored and marginalized WITHOUT marginalizing the entire population there, and since they are having a hugely difficult time, they deserve the same protection and help and state action that minorities get (they are, by the way, a minority) ? Now THAT would help the next president to be democratic. THAT is what we should do.
    - morgante 10y ago
      I'm not sure where you go the idea that I support instituting censorship. You seem to have written an entire comment attacking a non-existent strawman. To make it unequivocally clear: no, I do not think the government should be in the business of censoring news (fake or not).
      - candiodari 10y ago
        So what exactly do you think this anti-fake-news thing is ? You agreed that it's at least partially a matter of perspective.
  - meira 10y ago
    Lol. Are you saying ISIS was not founded by Hillary? What proof do you have?

tomp 10y ago

I was merely pointing out that "fake" is more of a propaganda, not a completely black and white issue. Or do you think it's a coincidence the "fake news" story only broke after the "non-fake" media lost the election, not before while they were still very confident they'd win?

morgante 10y ago
> I was merely pointing out that "fake" is more of a propaganda, not a completely black and white issue. Don't pretend that your comment history doesn't display a clear Trump bias. There might be some difficult cases at the margin, but lots of fake news is very easy to spot. No, ISIS was not founded by Clinton. No, Obama is not instituting Sharia law. No, George Soros is not hacking voting machines. > Or do you think it's a coincidence the "fake news" story only broke after the "non-fake" media lost the election, not before while they were still very confident they'd win? No, I don't think it's a coincidence. It seems very natural that new events would shine an event on existing trends. Or perhaps do you think that Islamic terrorism only began on 9/11, or that mortgage fraud began in 2008?
- tomp 10y ago
  I like to think that my comment history displays mostly a contrarian (vis-a-vis mainstream) bias, although admittedly that would seem pro-Trump to most HN users (I think yummyfajitas is often the target of similar accusations).
  - morgante 10y ago
    You can "like to think that" but there's a difference between being "contrarian" and partisan. Though I might disagree with yummyfajitas on things, he at least brings data and arguments to back up his claims instead of just asserting that the MSM is obviously fake and biased.
- candiodari 10y ago
  > No, I don't think it's a coincidence. It seems very natural that new events would shine an event on existing trends. Or perhaps do you think that Islamic terrorism only began on 9/11, or that mortgage fraud began in 2008? So instituting censorship (since you agree there is a bias in your previous paragraphs) to affect the outcome of an election is: 1) acceptable 2) you DO realize the keys to the kingdom will be handed off to Trump, Pence and Steve Bannon, right ? Really think about what you're doing here. You're mounting a bigger gun on a tank that will be driven by Trump. Do you seriously not realize who it'll be firing at ? But clearly you think things like censorship are acceptable as long as you agree with them. Hell, it seems the entire democratic establishment agrees with it. Why ? Just to not offend Hillary Clinton ? Fuck that. Trump won because he showcased the ugly side of the democratic party and Hillary Clinton in particular, quite successfully. And what is being done in response ? Dig deeper. Of course the issue MUST be that they're being shown in the wrong light by "fake" articles. Even if that actually is the issue you should still assume it's not. I would love it if this whole nonsense stopped, and some serious introspection would be done instead. How about we declare that Middle America's white supremacy fringe is about as offensive as Islam's sharia laws, that underwear toting rednecks with guns are pretty much the same thing as child-raping muslim "revolutionaries", and should be ignored and marginalized WITHOUT marginalizing the entire population there, and since they are having a hugely difficult time, they deserve the same protection and help and state action that minorities get (they are, by the way, a minority) ? Now THAT would help the next president to be democratic. THAT is what we should do.
  - morgante 10y ago
    I'm not sure where you go the idea that I support instituting censorship. You seem to have written an entire comment attacking a non-existent strawman. To make it unequivocally clear: no, I do not think the government should be in the business of censoring news (fake or not).
    - candiodari 10y ago
      So what exactly do you think this anti-fake-news thing is ? You agreed that it's at least partially a matter of perspective.
- meira 10y ago
  Lol. Are you saying ISIS was not founded by Hillary? What proof do you have?