3 ms·

Let's assume the Russian conspiracy is bogus. The question I want answered is: were all the news stories they claim to be fake really fake?

marcoperaza 10y ago
Yes. The digital equivalents of alien tabloids exist. Did it decide the election? No. It's not some crisis or anything new. The liberal-leaning media is trying to pull off a sleight of hand and bucket the entire conservative-leaning media with the alien tabloidesque ad-farms.
- saberlynx 10y ago
  Which is funny. Because they named A LOT of non mainstream media. So are these people really implying that non mainstream media swung the elections in favor of trump where THEY failed? What kind of admission is that?
norea-armozel 10y ago
Several major stories at least from what I've seen were fake. Like the "PizzaGate" story which was entirely a fabrication that got legs. So, I think there's a legitimate problem but I think WaPo is spinning it to mean Trump won because of fake news which I seriously doubt since exit polls showed most people either decided their vote months in advance of the "October Surprise" crap or within the two weeks before the election (with the majority being months before). The fact of the matter is that modern news is trash whether it comes from the big newspapers or cable networks. No one does their job at least in terms of filtering leads, minimizing editorialization in articles, and keeping the headlines tuned to the subject. Just those three things have really made it hard for me to know whether I was reading someone's opinion or an explanation of the facts. But the list as mentioned in the WaPo article is really not all that revealing. Some of the sites listed I know some of the people and they're far from Russian paid trolls like AntiWar.com. And Lewrockwell.com? That's Lew's blog for all intents and purposes. I don't like him but wow that list is utter crap. It doesn't target the real problem children like Daily Kos, Federalist, or Free Republic which I've seen them pass crap journalism or unfounded accusations as "news" just to name three news sites I've read in the past.
- achievingApathy 10y ago
  I have to admit I was absolutely fascinated with the PizzaGate story, and more specifically the people on Reddit who were adding to it. The sheer amount of will and investigation that went into to connect random points of information was astounding and terrifying.
- 3131s 10y ago
  Out of curiosity, how much time have you spent looking into pizzagate? Why are you sure that it's fake? Also source on antiwar.com being funded by Russia? No doubting you on any of this, just looking for more information.
  - norea-armozel 10y ago
    I never said AntiWar.com were paid by Russia or Russian Trolls. I said they were FAR FROM it (as in not those things). And yes, I have read about Pizzagate extensively. It's as fraudulent of a story as you can get.

marcoperaza 10y ago

Yes. The digital equivalents of alien tabloids exist. Did it decide the election? No. It's not some crisis or anything new. The liberal-leaning media is trying to pull off a sleight of hand and bucket the entire conservative-leaning media with the alien tabloidesque ad-farms.

saberlynx 10y ago
Which is funny. Because they named A LOT of non mainstream media. So are these people really implying that non mainstream media swung the elections in favor of trump where THEY failed? What kind of admission is that?

norea-armozel 10y ago

Several major stories at least from what I've seen were fake. Like the "PizzaGate" story which was entirely a fabrication that got legs. So, I think there's a legitimate problem but I think WaPo is spinning it to mean Trump won because of fake news which I seriously doubt since exit polls showed most people either decided their vote months in advance of the "October Surprise" crap or within the two weeks before the election (with the majority being months before). The fact of the matter is that modern news is trash whether it comes from the big newspapers or cable networks. No one does their job at least in terms of filtering leads, minimizing editorialization in articles, and keeping the headlines tuned to the subject. Just those three things have really made it hard for me to know whether I was reading someone's opinion or an explanation of the facts. But the list as mentioned in the WaPo article is really not all that revealing. Some of the sites listed I know some of the people and they're far from Russian paid trolls like AntiWar.com. And Lewrockwell.com? That's Lew's blog for all intents and purposes. I don't like him but wow that list is utter crap. It doesn't target the real problem children like Daily Kos, Federalist, or Free Republic which I've seen them pass crap journalism or unfounded accusations as "news" just to name three news sites I've read in the past.

achievingApathy 10y ago
I have to admit I was absolutely fascinated with the PizzaGate story, and more specifically the people on Reddit who were adding to it. The sheer amount of will and investigation that went into to connect random points of information was astounding and terrifying.
3131s 10y ago
Out of curiosity, how much time have you spent looking into pizzagate? Why are you sure that it's fake? Also source on antiwar.com being funded by Russia? No doubting you on any of this, just looking for more information.
- norea-armozel 10y ago
  I never said AntiWar.com were paid by Russia or Russian Trolls. I said they were FAR FROM it (as in not those things). And yes, I have read about Pizzagate extensively. It's as fraudulent of a story as you can get.