3 ms·
It's not one or two times when I've seen people take seriously some piece from Onion or equivalents (and then go ranting about Trump or whatever, even after poi
by ptaipale 10y ago
It's not one or two times when I've seen people take seriously some piece from Onion or equivalents (and then go ranting about Trump or whatever, even after pointing out it was satire, because it could be true).
- throwaway5752 10y agoOkay, but so what? People are always going to be stupid, but any reasonable person knows The Onion intends to entertain and there were a number of other sites that intended to mislead for money or other reasons. One thing we do kind of poorly as a field in software many times is we get to clever about counterexamples from the 20% side of the pareto principle and say, "well, nothing can be done". As far as fake, news, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it is usually fine.
- pharrington 10y agoWhen the media outlets first coined the term "fake news," http://nationalreport.net/ http://nationalreport.net/ was their Exhibit A. Its current main headline is "Trump Reports World Record 39 Under Par, 12 Holes-in-One, During Golf Outing with Japanese Prime Minister." In November, one of its front page stories was "Chris Christie nominated to head of Supreme Food Court." That is the primary example people were using to make the case to create centralized "trusted news sources." I'm not really sure what the Pareto principle has to do with this.