4 ms·

One side calls it fake news, another lugenpresse. Some from both want to police it and tell everyone else what needs to be silenced. This is why free speech i

One side calls it fake news, another lugenpresse. Some from both want to police it and tell everyone else what needs to be silenced. This is why free speech is so important.

MrZongle2 10y ago
"One side calls it fake news, another lugenpresse." Correction: two groups are using that word. One is an extremist faction. The other is an opposing faction gleefully trying to connect the historical use of the word to a candidate and his supporters in general. Edit: to the authors of the responses below, thank you for taking time to provide a rebuttal (I'm not sure why HN isn't allowing me to reply further). To those individuals who simply downvoted and moved on, I believe the German word you're looking for in this case is säuberung.
- genieyclo 10y ago
  What if I told you there are more than these 2 sides?
- mwfunk 10y ago
  I don't think anyone is gleeful about it at all. I think people are freaked out, angry, and frightened and have a right to feel that way. The candidate drew on that extremist faction for support during his campaign, didn't make any effort to distance himself from that extremist faction, and surrounded himself with people that that extremist faction were delighted by during his campaign. Then, after winning, not only does he not distance himself from the people he had previously surrounded himself with, but appears to be following through in terms of appointments and proposed legislation that, again, absolutely delights that extremist faction. I get that the candidate is not a member of that extremist faction, but if that extremist faction adores that candidate and voices strong agreement with every political appointment and policy position, many people have good reason for being a little concerned about it. I don't know why this is so hard for people to grasp. Just because a particular argument is being used by his political opponents for the purpose of discrediting him, doesn't mean that that argument isn't a real issue that people should be very aware of and concerned about.
  - makomk 10y ago
    Except that the extremist faction is tiny, politically irrelevant, and not nearly that happy with his proposed appointments and legislation. For example, the New York Times Editorial Board is currently attacking Trump for failing to denounce a 200-strong white nationalist meeting that's been happening annually in Washington since 2011 and has achieved nothing in that time, organised by a man whose hope for the Trump presidency - as per the NYT's reporting - is that maybe he'll abandon all his actual policies and adopt ones that actually make white nationalists happy. Their only victory so far seems to be getting the NYT to give them a whole bunch of free publicity by quoting them in great detail yesterday.
    - JohnTHaller 10y ago
      Except for the fact that Spencer is one of the leaders of the alt right. He even coined the term "alt right". And Bannon turned Breitbart (which my conservative friends derisively call Trumpbart) into a "platform for the alt right" and used it to both get Trump elected and get himself into the White House.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
Problem is, the side that says lugenpresse is also loathe to criticize their standard-bearer, and many believe that people who criticize him should be punished. False equivalence is far worse than fake news; it's the legitimization of the factually true and the morally wrong.

One side calls it fake news, another lugenpresse. Some from both want to police it and tell everyone else what needs to be silenced. This is why free speech is so important.

MrZongle2 10y ago

"One side calls it fake news, another lugenpresse." Correction: two groups are using that word. One is an extremist faction. The other is an opposing faction gleefully trying to connect the historical use of the word to a candidate and his supporters in general. Edit: to the authors of the responses below, thank you for taking time to provide a rebuttal (I'm not sure why HN isn't allowing me to reply further). To those individuals who simply downvoted and moved on, I believe the German word you're looking for in this case is säuberung.

genieyclo 10y ago
What if I told you there are more than these 2 sides?
mwfunk 10y ago
I don't think anyone is gleeful about it at all. I think people are freaked out, angry, and frightened and have a right to feel that way. The candidate drew on that extremist faction for support during his campaign, didn't make any effort to distance himself from that extremist faction, and surrounded himself with people that that extremist faction were delighted by during his campaign. Then, after winning, not only does he not distance himself from the people he had previously surrounded himself with, but appears to be following through in terms of appointments and proposed legislation that, again, absolutely delights that extremist faction. I get that the candidate is not a member of that extremist faction, but if that extremist faction adores that candidate and voices strong agreement with every political appointment and policy position, many people have good reason for being a little concerned about it. I don't know why this is so hard for people to grasp. Just because a particular argument is being used by his political opponents for the purpose of discrediting him, doesn't mean that that argument isn't a real issue that people should be very aware of and concerned about.
- makomk 10y ago
  Except that the extremist faction is tiny, politically irrelevant, and not nearly that happy with his proposed appointments and legislation. For example, the New York Times Editorial Board is currently attacking Trump for failing to denounce a 200-strong white nationalist meeting that's been happening annually in Washington since 2011 and has achieved nothing in that time, organised by a man whose hope for the Trump presidency - as per the NYT's reporting - is that maybe he'll abandon all his actual policies and adopt ones that actually make white nationalists happy. Their only victory so far seems to be getting the NYT to give them a whole bunch of free publicity by quoting them in great detail yesterday.
  - JohnTHaller 10y ago
    Except for the fact that Spencer is one of the leaders of the alt right. He even coined the term "alt right". And Bannon turned Breitbart (which my conservative friends derisively call Trumpbart) into a "platform for the alt right" and used it to both get Trump elected and get himself into the White House.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago

Problem is, the side that says lugenpresse is also loathe to criticize their standard-bearer, and many believe that people who criticize him should be punished. False equivalence is far worse than fake news; it's the legitimization of the factually true and the morally wrong.