3 ms·

When people speak of "fake news" they're generally not talking about news with factual mistakes, but often times where the fact picking mechanism is biased. You

When people speak of "fake news" they're generally not talking about news with factual mistakes, but often times where the fact picking mechanism is biased. You can produce a piece that is 100% factual that still omits important facts that are relevant to the story and would paint a completely different picture. Most of the sites you mentioned do that very consistently.

closeparen 8y ago
It's ironic to argue the definitions of post-truth, but no. Fake news refers to stories that are fabricated, and usually calibrated to be attention-grabbing, masquerading as news. That is a separate phenomenon from bias, and much worse. Bias is a problem that can interfere with the output of people who think they are doing good-faith journalism. But anyone with a blog can write what other people will mistake for news, and if they're good, can make it go viral. No relationship with the truth, not even an attempted one, is involved. Conservative slant headline: Hero CCW Bystander Stops Mass Shooting. Liberal slant headline: Mass Shooting Underscores the Need for Gun Control Now. Fake news headline: New Proof That Lizard Men Hired Crisis Actors in Plot to Take Your Guns.
- arduanika 8y ago
  > Fake news refers to... That might be how you use the term, but that might more correctly called "false news". In common parlance, "fake news" refers to an overall pattern of filtering and narrative-pushing such that consuming lots of these stories (possibly each of them factual) will leave the reader with gross misapprehensions about the world.
  - closeparen 8y ago
    This is not a productive argument, but it may be worth nothing that Science [0], Wikipedia [1], and NPR [2] are using it to refer to fabrication, not bias. [0] http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/01/majority-americans-were-not-exposed-fake-news-2016-us-election-twitter-study-suggests http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/01/majority-americans-we... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/503146770/npr-finds-the-head-of-a-covert-fake-news-operation-in-the-suburbs https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/50...
    - darkpuma 8y ago
      To be honest I think they're pissing into the wind. (As am I when I tell people to use the word "propaganda" instead of "fake news".)
    - PhantomGremlin 8y ago
      Wikipedia does not belong on that list. It's useful for non-controversial stuff. I love to peruse it, I love to quote from it. But it can't possibly be trusted for anything as topical as "Fake News". I love the Michael Scott comment: Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject. So you know you are getting the best possible information. (For those who aren't familiar with the US version of The Office: Michael Scott is not meant to be taken literally).
      - gbhn 8y ago
        The history is that 'fake news" was used to refer to fabricated stories. Following it's surge in.popularity following the 2016 election, Trump realized the term was catchy and claimed falsely to have invented it, but used it instead to refer to "news Trump doesn't like" of various sorts, thus making it a contentious term.
arduanika 8y ago
Exactly. The charge is not "false news"; it's "fake news". Filtered, processed, manufactured, spun, all while generally keeping things technically correct -- the best kind of correct.
- sintaxi 8y ago
  Bingo. It comes down to facts and truth being two different things and the news is almost never truthful anymore.
- vertline3 8y ago
  Well I think slanted news becomes easier as economic models get leaner. Broke? sell to a person wanting to hide behind earned past reputation. Furthermore, outrage is the most addicting emotion (according to post on HN apologizing for creating the internet) so news that draws a person in, tends to outrage. being reasonable, means some audience will leave to go to the more addicting outrage. This is my hypothesis only.

closeparen 8y ago

It's ironic to argue the definitions of post-truth, but no. Fake news refers to stories that are fabricated, and usually calibrated to be attention-grabbing, masquerading as news. That is a separate phenomenon from bias, and much worse. Bias is a problem that can interfere with the output of people who think they are doing good-faith journalism. But anyone with a blog can write what other people will mistake for news, and if they're good, can make it go viral. No relationship with the truth, not even an attempted one, is involved. Conservative slant headline: Hero CCW Bystander Stops Mass Shooting. Liberal slant headline: Mass Shooting Underscores the Need for Gun Control Now. Fake news headline: New Proof That Lizard Men Hired Crisis Actors in Plot to Take Your Guns.

arduanika 8y ago
> Fake news refers to... That might be how you use the term, but that might more correctly called "false news". In common parlance, "fake news" refers to an overall pattern of filtering and narrative-pushing such that consuming lots of these stories (possibly each of them factual) will leave the reader with gross misapprehensions about the world.
- closeparen 8y ago
  This is not a productive argument, but it may be worth nothing that Science [0], Wikipedia [1], and NPR [2] are using it to refer to fabrication, not bias. [0] http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/01/majority-americans-were-not-exposed-fake-news-2016-us-election-twitter-study-suggests http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/01/majority-americans-we... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/503146770/npr-finds-the-head-of-a-covert-fake-news-operation-in-the-suburbs https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/50...
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    To be honest I think they're pissing into the wind. (As am I when I tell people to use the word "propaganda" instead of "fake news".)
  - PhantomGremlin 8y ago
    Wikipedia does not belong on that list. It's useful for non-controversial stuff. I love to peruse it, I love to quote from it. But it can't possibly be trusted for anything as topical as "Fake News". I love the Michael Scott comment: Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject. So you know you are getting the best possible information. (For those who aren't familiar with the US version of The Office: Michael Scott is not meant to be taken literally).
    - gbhn 8y ago
      The history is that 'fake news" was used to refer to fabricated stories. Following it's surge in.popularity following the 2016 election, Trump realized the term was catchy and claimed falsely to have invented it, but used it instead to refer to "news Trump doesn't like" of various sorts, thus making it a contentious term.

arduanika 8y ago

Exactly. The charge is not "false news"; it's "fake news". Filtered, processed, manufactured, spun, all while generally keeping things technically correct -- the best kind of correct.

sintaxi 8y ago
Bingo. It comes down to facts and truth being two different things and the news is almost never truthful anymore.
vertline3 8y ago
Well I think slanted news becomes easier as economic models get leaner. Broke? sell to a person wanting to hide behind earned past reputation. Furthermore, outrage is the most addicting emotion (according to post on HN apologizing for creating the internet) so news that draws a person in, tends to outrage. being reasonable, means some audience will leave to go to the more addicting outrage. This is my hypothesis only.