12 ms·

>Who decides which sites have "real" news and which sites have "fake" news? https://www.newsguardtech.com/about/team/ https://www.newsguardtech.com/about/team/

m348e912 8y ago
RT ran an interesting peice on NewsGuard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkY9fMK26dE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkY9fMK26dE
- tptacek 8y ago
  Well, not that I love being this glib, but, I guess now I know what the Russian government wants me to think about NewsGuard. Also: because WaPo and NYT have issued corrections about Deripaska stories, they're "repeat offenders" who "publish lies" (their citation: Fox News). Also, according to the chyron, I should be really scared of Islam.
  - Bartweiss 8y ago
    It's a reasonable criticism of RT, but it's amusing how thoroughly it cuts both ways: we now know what the Russian government wants us to think about NewsGuard, and also what a team of former US government officials want us to think about RT. That's not to say RT is a usable source, I'm not particularly interested in their coverage here. But I'm also not very interested in hearing what news Michael Hayden wants me to listen to.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      I don't as much need to care what the US government thinks, because the US government doesn't fund any of its best known media companies. As you can pretty clearly see, most of the US news media market works in opposition to the current US administration.
      - dingaling 8y ago
        It doesn't matter if us.gov funds media or not if third-parties are nudging people to only trust sources acting in the US interest. Sure they might oppose the sitting President but would they publish something which would undermine stated US diplomatic policy?
  - acqq 8y ago
    > Also, according to the chyron, I should be really scared of Islam. Citation needed. It almost seems that you invented something just as an attempt to demotivate people from taking a look. Normally I don't watch videos, but this time I got curious, and I've seen only "Belgian Imam embroiled in the scandal" in the chyron. But while checking that, I've found out that the video has some real points: - Co-founder of the NewsGuard: former columnist of the Wall Street Journal, for which EFF wrote that he "repeatedly gets his facts wrong about the NSA surveillance." - In Advisory Board: Michael Hayden, former NSA and CIA director, Tom Ridge, former First secretary of Homeland Security, Richard Stengel, former Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy
- arijun 8y ago
  You should also read the RT pieces on how Crimea liberated itself, and how Putin won every election fair and square
  - amaccuish 8y ago
    > how Putin won every election fair and square Maybe there was some tampering here and there but I got the impression when I lived there that most people thought he was good and supported him.
    - jqt 8y ago
      Some people in the west are shocked when they find out people can also be happy when they don't live in liberal democracies, like Russia, China or SK.
    - pvg 8y ago
      there was some tampering here and there Systematically and violently suppressing any political opposition is a lot more than 'some tampering here and there'.
Shivetya 8y ago
a list of names provides not real context to "who" decides. For the most part people will dismiss them quickly when the outcome does not match their personal views. so both sides will simply find examples to further their beliefs. for the most part these services are both circle the wagon and circle jerk in nature. circle the wagon because journalist of the same beliefs want to protect each other and circle jerk because their choices will simply be beneficial to those they already agree with. the public as I mentioned before will just dismiss it as more of the same. the internet is good at holding them to account and they don't like it.
avn2109 8y ago
Does this organization have a published definition of "Fake News?" I suspect not, because in general, nobody can agree on a definition of it.
- wonthegame 8y ago
  I think people tend to categorize obvious exaggerations as fake news but in reality fake news is much more subtle than that.
- kbenson 8y ago
  Just because the public can't come to a definition, doesn't mean that a small group can't come to consensus about what it is with regard to what they can police. It may not match your definition, but it could be well defined. That said, I have no idea if they have done so.
- macintux 8y ago
  If you look at the criteria they’re using, “fake news” isn’t one of them.
raxxorrax 8y ago
Since they are a team, they are already destined to fail. A team tends to gravitate to a particular position. So they will fail not only because nobody uses Edge.

m348e912 8y ago

RT ran an interesting peice on NewsGuard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkY9fMK26dE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkY9fMK26dE

tptacek 8y ago
Well, not that I love being this glib, but, I guess now I know what the Russian government wants me to think about NewsGuard. Also: because WaPo and NYT have issued corrections about Deripaska stories, they're "repeat offenders" who "publish lies" (their citation: Fox News). Also, according to the chyron, I should be really scared of Islam.
- Bartweiss 8y ago
  It's a reasonable criticism of RT, but it's amusing how thoroughly it cuts both ways: we now know what the Russian government wants us to think about NewsGuard, and also what a team of former US government officials want us to think about RT. That's not to say RT is a usable source, I'm not particularly interested in their coverage here. But I'm also not very interested in hearing what news Michael Hayden wants me to listen to.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    I don't as much need to care what the US government thinks, because the US government doesn't fund any of its best known media companies. As you can pretty clearly see, most of the US news media market works in opposition to the current US administration.
    - dingaling 8y ago
      It doesn't matter if us.gov funds media or not if third-parties are nudging people to only trust sources acting in the US interest. Sure they might oppose the sitting President but would they publish something which would undermine stated US diplomatic policy?
- acqq 8y ago
  > Also, according to the chyron, I should be really scared of Islam. Citation needed. It almost seems that you invented something just as an attempt to demotivate people from taking a look. Normally I don't watch videos, but this time I got curious, and I've seen only "Belgian Imam embroiled in the scandal" in the chyron. But while checking that, I've found out that the video has some real points: - Co-founder of the NewsGuard: former columnist of the Wall Street Journal, for which EFF wrote that he "repeatedly gets his facts wrong about the NSA surveillance." - In Advisory Board: Michael Hayden, former NSA and CIA director, Tom Ridge, former First secretary of Homeland Security, Richard Stengel, former Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy
arijun 8y ago
You should also read the RT pieces on how Crimea liberated itself, and how Putin won every election fair and square
- amaccuish 8y ago
  > how Putin won every election fair and square Maybe there was some tampering here and there but I got the impression when I lived there that most people thought he was good and supported him.
  - jqt 8y ago
    Some people in the west are shocked when they find out people can also be happy when they don't live in liberal democracies, like Russia, China or SK.
  - pvg 8y ago
    there was some tampering here and there Systematically and violently suppressing any political opposition is a lot more than 'some tampering here and there'.

Shivetya 8y ago

a list of names provides not real context to "who" decides. For the most part people will dismiss them quickly when the outcome does not match their personal views. so both sides will simply find examples to further their beliefs. for the most part these services are both circle the wagon and circle jerk in nature. circle the wagon because journalist of the same beliefs want to protect each other and circle jerk because their choices will simply be beneficial to those they already agree with. the public as I mentioned before will just dismiss it as more of the same. the internet is good at holding them to account and they don't like it.

avn2109 8y ago

Does this organization have a published definition of "Fake News?" I suspect not, because in general, nobody can agree on a definition of it.

wonthegame 8y ago
I think people tend to categorize obvious exaggerations as fake news but in reality fake news is much more subtle than that.
kbenson 8y ago
Just because the public can't come to a definition, doesn't mean that a small group can't come to consensus about what it is with regard to what they can police. It may not match your definition, but it could be well defined. That said, I have no idea if they have done so.
macintux 8y ago
If you look at the criteria they’re using, “fake news” isn’t one of them.

raxxorrax 8y ago

Since they are a team, they are already destined to fail. A team tends to gravitate to a particular position. So they will fail not only because nobody uses Edge.