I'd recommend reading the original story[1] if you've only read this wave of criticism about it. The PropOrNot portion is only a relatively small part of the wh

I'd recommend reading the original story[1] if you've only read this wave of criticism about it. The PropOrNot portion is only a relatively small part of the whole piece. And yes, they may have jumped the gun on that source a bit. But I also think the characterization that this is neo-McCarthyism (see The Intercept's hysterical take [2]) by the Washington Post is far out of whack. The piece as a whole, regarding Russian interference in the election and use of social media for propaganda, is a well researched piece and continues to be vindicated by reports and news that has come out since.[3][4] edit: sources [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/russian-propaganda-effort-helped-spread-fake-news-during-election-experts-say/2016/11/24/793903b6-8a40-4ca9-b712-716af66098fe_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/russian-prop... [2] https://theintercept.com/2016/11/26/washington-post-disgracefully-promotes-a-mccarthyite-blacklist-from-a-new-hidden-and-very-shady-group/ https://theintercept.com/2016/11/26/washington-post-disgrace... [3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-01/russia-weaponized-social-media-in-u-s-election-fireeye-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-01/russia-we... [4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-orders-review-of-russian-hacking-during-presidential-campaign/2016/12/09/31d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama...