4 ms·
That’s a fair insight. (And, yeah, title needs 2016 added). Now I’m curious to see how the comment thread grows. The negativity at this moment could be anchor
by dogruck 9y ago
That’s a fair insight. (And, yeah, title needs 2016 added).
Now I’m curious to see how the comment thread grows. The negativity at this moment could be anchored in the observations of the first couple of top-level comments.
Certainly it’s fair to characterize this as a PR puff piece. It’s common practice for companies to buddy-up with news publishers on stories such as this.
But, yes, between 2016 and today we’ve definitely leapt into the era of Fake News.
- xxs 9y agoThe article was published on the 25th of Feb, 2016 (so 2016 in the title).
- emodendroket 9y ago> But, yes, between 2016 and today we’ve definitely leapt into the era of Fake News. Have we, though? The evidence for "fake news" as a phenomenon qualitatively (or even quantitatively) different than chain e-mail forwards is, to my way of thinking, pretty slim.
- dogruck 9y agoThe phenomenon is as old as news. The terminology and hyper awareness is fresh.