3 ms·

> It's miles more credible than the stories found on fake news sites. 1000 * 0 is still 0. If the Trump campaign had ordered a dossier of dirt on Hillary Clin

by imron 10y ago

> It's miles more credible than the stories found on fake news sites. 1000 * 0 is still 0. If the Trump campaign had ordered a dossier of dirt on Hillary Clinton, and paid a respected former intelligence officer to provide it, would the claims made in it be credible? Let's take one of the big 'fake news' items from the recent election, the one regarding Hillary's health. What do you make of this article by a former secret service agent on Hillary Clinton's health: http://ijr.com/opinion/2016/09/260018-protected-hillary-clinton-secret-service-heres-noticed-fainting-video/ http://ijr.com/opinion/2016/09/260018-protected-hillary-clin... None of the facts in that article are in disrepute either, and it's also from a respected secret service agent. So are the questions it poses about Hillary's health more or less credible than the Trump dossier, and is it fake news or not?

intended 10y ago
No it's not? The definition of fake news is getting stretched to include controversial news. "Fake news" is fiction being sold as news on websites that look credible. Flat out making stuff up, and polluting the media stream with it in order to manipulate people. This is the easy case to solve. As people actually try to grapple with this, "fake news" will evolve, it will add parts of the truth to it dodge this 0th level definition. A dossier actually compiled but unverified is still not fake news - it's a shady bad practice circa 1990. Unfortunately we're dealing with much worse problems today.
- imron 10y ago
  Ok, so if I compile a dossier of unverified stories regarding Hillary, and package them up then it suddenly makes otherwise fake claims not fake news? I mean that's the whole sub-prime mortgage problem all over again. Take a shitty product and wrap it in layers of respectability until people don't know any better. When there is also evidence to suggest much of the contents of the dossier came from a 4-chan prank, it's hard to see where the difference is.
  - intended 10y ago
    I think you need to clarify 2 concepts/definitions, agnostic of real world events. 1) fake news: a recent phenomenon where fraudulent/fictional/completely made up literature is peddled as legitimate news. This is then distributed on steroids via social media. It uses unsuspecting people to transmit this. Bias in news. This is an older problem and involves how news is presented and what spin is put. In the worst case it is deliberate in order to support an agenda.
    - imron 10y ago
      I don't think 'bias in news' begins to cover the sort of things that went on in the recent US election though. There was a lot of anti-Trump news that basically matches what you said above: > "fake news" will evolve, it will add parts of the truth to it dodge this 0th level definition * Trump kicked a mother and baby out of rally * Trump mocked a reporter's disability * Trump proposed building database of muslims And the list goes on. This goes well beyond the realm of media bias, and in to direct collusion between media and the campaign. I have no problem calling that 'fake news', which is perhaps a descriptive approach rather than a prescriptive one.
      - intended 10y ago
        Hey - trump alone was a candidate unlike any other - and entering the stage after years of escalation in rhetoric. On top of that trump himself courted controversy at a rate and scale never seen before. That's why this election was faced with drama unlike elections before them. A lot of stuff listed above is sadly the regular calumny inflicted upon candidates. Iirc someone got kicked out of the race because of a bad photo op. But These are all things that are problematic- without being fake news.
      - coolgeek 10y ago
        > * Trump kicked a mother and baby out of rally > * Trump mocked a reporter's disability Do you deny that these things happened? Has any other candidate - of any party - ever done anything like this? Is the media supposed to pretend that it didn't happen? This is where the "the facts have a well known liberal bias" joke comes from
untog 10y ago
I wouldn't describe this as fake news at all, but I'd say that one person's view on a video they have watched isn't comparable to that dossier, which was (apparently) compiled from numerous in-person visits and interviews. Not to mention, reporting on the dossier always clarified that it was not verified, while this opinion piece is making broader conclusions. I agree with you broadly, though. To me, fake news has absolutely no mooring in reality whatsoever and is pure clickbait - usually without political motive beyond getting angry people to click.
- imron 10y ago
  > isn't comparable to that dossier, which was (apparently) compiled from numerous in-person visits and interviews And that (apparently) can trace its origins to a 4-chan prank?
  - untog 10y ago
    That depends on whether you consider the word of an anonymous 4channer to be as reliable as that of a former intelligence officer. Personally, I do not.
    - imron 10y ago
      It's not so much the word, as the time-stamped posts from months before the news was published.
      - untog 10y ago
        Any links? Last I checked those were pretty thoroughly debunked. http://gizmodo.com/4chan-idiots-claim-they-invented-the-trump-piss-report-1791067589 http://gizmodo.com/4chan-idiots-claim-they-invented-the-trum...

by imron 10y ago

intended 10y ago

No it's not? The definition of fake news is getting stretched to include controversial news. "Fake news" is fiction being sold as news on websites that look credible. Flat out making stuff up, and polluting the media stream with it in order to manipulate people. This is the easy case to solve. As people actually try to grapple with this, "fake news" will evolve, it will add parts of the truth to it dodge this 0th level definition. A dossier actually compiled but unverified is still not fake news - it's a shady bad practice circa 1990. Unfortunately we're dealing with much worse problems today.

imron 10y ago
Ok, so if I compile a dossier of unverified stories regarding Hillary, and package them up then it suddenly makes otherwise fake claims not fake news? I mean that's the whole sub-prime mortgage problem all over again. Take a shitty product and wrap it in layers of respectability until people don't know any better. When there is also evidence to suggest much of the contents of the dossier came from a 4-chan prank, it's hard to see where the difference is.
- intended 10y ago
  I think you need to clarify 2 concepts/definitions, agnostic of real world events. 1) fake news: a recent phenomenon where fraudulent/fictional/completely made up literature is peddled as legitimate news. This is then distributed on steroids via social media. It uses unsuspecting people to transmit this. Bias in news. This is an older problem and involves how news is presented and what spin is put. In the worst case it is deliberate in order to support an agenda.
  - imron 10y ago
    I don't think 'bias in news' begins to cover the sort of things that went on in the recent US election though. There was a lot of anti-Trump news that basically matches what you said above: > "fake news" will evolve, it will add parts of the truth to it dodge this 0th level definition * Trump kicked a mother and baby out of rally * Trump mocked a reporter's disability * Trump proposed building database of muslims And the list goes on. This goes well beyond the realm of media bias, and in to direct collusion between media and the campaign. I have no problem calling that 'fake news', which is perhaps a descriptive approach rather than a prescriptive one.
    - intended 10y ago
      Hey - trump alone was a candidate unlike any other - and entering the stage after years of escalation in rhetoric. On top of that trump himself courted controversy at a rate and scale never seen before. That's why this election was faced with drama unlike elections before them. A lot of stuff listed above is sadly the regular calumny inflicted upon candidates. Iirc someone got kicked out of the race because of a bad photo op. But These are all things that are problematic- without being fake news.
    - coolgeek 10y ago
      > * Trump kicked a mother and baby out of rally > * Trump mocked a reporter's disability Do you deny that these things happened? Has any other candidate - of any party - ever done anything like this? Is the media supposed to pretend that it didn't happen? This is where the "the facts have a well known liberal bias" joke comes from

untog 10y ago

I wouldn't describe this as fake news at all, but I'd say that one person's view on a video they have watched isn't comparable to that dossier, which was (apparently) compiled from numerous in-person visits and interviews. Not to mention, reporting on the dossier always clarified that it was not verified, while this opinion piece is making broader conclusions. I agree with you broadly, though. To me, fake news has absolutely no mooring in reality whatsoever and is pure clickbait - usually without political motive beyond getting angry people to click.

imron 10y ago
> isn't comparable to that dossier, which was (apparently) compiled from numerous in-person visits and interviews And that (apparently) can trace its origins to a 4-chan prank?
- untog 10y ago
  That depends on whether you consider the word of an anonymous 4channer to be as reliable as that of a former intelligence officer. Personally, I do not.
  - imron 10y ago
    It's not so much the word, as the time-stamped posts from months before the news was published.
    - untog 10y ago
      Any links? Last I checked those were pretty thoroughly debunked. http://gizmodo.com/4chan-idiots-claim-they-invented-the-trump-piss-report-1791067589 http://gizmodo.com/4chan-idiots-claim-they-invented-the-trum...