3 ms·

Oh come on. "Election hacking" is not a general term. Unless "general term" is a general term you're redefining - which I wouldn't rule out at this point. If s

by smokeyj 10y ago

Oh come on. "Election hacking" is not a general term. Unless "general term" is a general term you're redefining - which I wouldn't rule out at this point. If such general term exists, it would be more appropriately used to describe the DNC's unconventional relationship with media employees. But please, for the sake of everyone's sanity, let us not randomly redefine english words - even if regurgitated by your favorite media news outlet.

burkaman 10y ago
"Hacking" was redefined a long time ago. Growth hacking, life hacking, etc. Used in this way, "hacking" is a fairly general term.
- smokeyj 10y ago
  But those are obviously non-literal uses of the word. Growth hacking would never be used to describe someone's legs getting chopped off. OP used the word "fake news" and got downvoted to oblivion, but it's truly a wonderful demonstration of how subjective terms are used to manufacture narratives. Down with the hyperbole, man.
  - soundwave106 10y ago
    Personally, I feel that the "fake news" verbiage was too strong of a denunciation for a headline wording choice. Especially since: A) "Election hacking" has become a common shorthand of the event in multiple media sources (whether this reflects a "manufactured narrative", I cannot say, but I've seen "election hacking" as shorthand all over the place), and B) The article did contain a detailed description of the event, in a way I think accurately reflects the current state ("major data breaches of the email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton adviser John Podesta, committed, allegedly, by Russian-sponsored hackers and fed to the world via WikiLeaks".) I do agree that this portion of the headline is inaccurate at face value, and that there are much better shorthands for this event, but calling an article "fake news" just for a bad headline is too harsh.
    - smokeyj 10y ago
      > whether this reflects a "manufactured narrative", I cannot say Based on what you know about the human primate, what do you think the truth is? Too harsh or not harsh enough, who knows. All I know is "fake news" will be used to describe news you don't agree with, for whatever reason you like. Let's at least be honest with ourselves.
      - soundwave106 10y ago
        Want my opinion? I see the general term "election hacking" or variations thereof on news sites that are conservative as well, such as the Wall Street Journal (http://www.wsj.com/articles/congressional-calls-grow-for-a-probe-of-russian-hacking-in-u-s-election-1481151191 http://www.wsj.com/articles/congressional-calls-grow-for-a-p...) and Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/01/07/was-fridays-declassified-report-claiming-russian-hacking-2016-election-rigged.html http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/01/07/was-fridays-declas...). So I have trouble accepting the narrative that this term itself is a tantrum being thrown by media that "lost", if some of the media that lean on the side that won are also using the term. And, yes, you are right, I do suspect that the OP probably used the term "fake news" because he or she did not agree that there was an election hack, or at least believes that the source reporting is too biased in some way. With no further argument other than the "fake news" term, I found that post rather weak.
CodeWriter23 10y ago
Revealing truth that power wants to keep secret is not hacking; it's called "Journalism". Of course, I don't expect people under the age of about 40 to understand that because in their lifetimes, with a few notable exceptions, "journalist" has been redefined to mean something more like "spokesperson".

by smokeyj 10y ago

burkaman 10y ago

"Hacking" was redefined a long time ago. Growth hacking, life hacking, etc. Used in this way, "hacking" is a fairly general term.

smokeyj 10y ago
But those are obviously non-literal uses of the word. Growth hacking would never be used to describe someone's legs getting chopped off. OP used the word "fake news" and got downvoted to oblivion, but it's truly a wonderful demonstration of how subjective terms are used to manufacture narratives. Down with the hyperbole, man.
- soundwave106 10y ago
  Personally, I feel that the "fake news" verbiage was too strong of a denunciation for a headline wording choice. Especially since: A) "Election hacking" has become a common shorthand of the event in multiple media sources (whether this reflects a "manufactured narrative", I cannot say, but I've seen "election hacking" as shorthand all over the place), and B) The article did contain a detailed description of the event, in a way I think accurately reflects the current state ("major data breaches of the email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton adviser John Podesta, committed, allegedly, by Russian-sponsored hackers and fed to the world via WikiLeaks".) I do agree that this portion of the headline is inaccurate at face value, and that there are much better shorthands for this event, but calling an article "fake news" just for a bad headline is too harsh.
  - smokeyj 10y ago
    > whether this reflects a "manufactured narrative", I cannot say Based on what you know about the human primate, what do you think the truth is? Too harsh or not harsh enough, who knows. All I know is "fake news" will be used to describe news you don't agree with, for whatever reason you like. Let's at least be honest with ourselves.
    - soundwave106 10y ago
      Want my opinion? I see the general term "election hacking" or variations thereof on news sites that are conservative as well, such as the Wall Street Journal (http://www.wsj.com/articles/congressional-calls-grow-for-a-probe-of-russian-hacking-in-u-s-election-1481151191 http://www.wsj.com/articles/congressional-calls-grow-for-a-p...) and Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/01/07/was-fridays-declassified-report-claiming-russian-hacking-2016-election-rigged.html http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/01/07/was-fridays-declas...). So I have trouble accepting the narrative that this term itself is a tantrum being thrown by media that "lost", if some of the media that lean on the side that won are also using the term. And, yes, you are right, I do suspect that the OP probably used the term "fake news" because he or she did not agree that there was an election hack, or at least believes that the source reporting is too biased in some way. With no further argument other than the "fake news" term, I found that post rather weak.

CodeWriter23 10y ago

Revealing truth that power wants to keep secret is not hacking; it's called "Journalism". Of course, I don't expect people under the age of about 40 to understand that because in their lifetimes, with a few notable exceptions, "journalist" has been redefined to mean something more like "spokesperson".