4 ms·

I'm a bit annoyed when people talk about "fake news" as if everyone understands what that means. It seems pretty clear to me that different people have differen

I'm a bit annoyed when people talk about "fake news" as if everyone understands what that means. It seems pretty clear to me that different people have different conceptions of what that is.

nothanksmydude 7y ago
One of the best ways to make me cringe is to use "fake news" as a joke in the completely wrong context. It physically hurts me to realize this every time it happens (which is unfortunately common) Not implying you are doing this, had to chime in tho cause it really does piss me off I should clarify that doing this on purpose isn't even remotely funny. It's the realiziation that they have an extremely incorrect understanding of the term that hurts
josteink 7y ago
It’s also interesting that those who popularized the term “fake news” (left wing politicians) used it to discredit their opposition, by claiming some sort of “collusion” between Trump and the Russians. And now that whole construct, which was reported on to great lengths by “real” news outlets, has been proven to be “fake news” as well. As in, the phenomenon of fake news was actually faked? Could this even be messier? No wonder nobody trusts anything anymore.
- austincheney 7y ago
  While everybody may use or abuse that term there is only person who popularized that term, to me, and that person does not claim to be left wing.
  - Izkata 7y ago
    Trump may have popularized it, but Clinton created it [0], almost immediately after losing the election. [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42724320 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42724320
    - krapp 7y ago
      Clinton didn't create the term fake news. The article you link to mentions her having used the term in a speech, but that doesn't mean she created it, nor, as I assume we're meant to infer, that she or the Democratic Party fabricated the phenomenon referred to as a post-hoc rationalization for having lost the election. In fact, if you read the Wikipedia article on fake news[0], you'll note the term as well as the phenomenon predate Clinton's campaign and loss, even within that campaign cycle. People were talking about it well before that point. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news
      - identity-haver 7y ago
        The term has existed, but was popularized and brought into the common discourse immediately after the 2016 election: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=fake%20news https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=f...
      - postHoc 7y ago
        But it really is a post-hoc rationalization for having lost the election. Just like the racist version of the pepe frog meme, and all of its subsequent variants were a form of Streisand effect, for having claimed as much. There wasn't much in the way of attachment for those particular memes, until the bumbling claim was made that they were being deployed in earnest as weapons, which hadn't been the case until after the claim was made. This process has been accelerating, with more absurdities and meaningless drivel being bastardized ironically, until intolerable, at which point the symbolism is galvanized, post-hoc, as a matador for emotional outrage. At which point it gets discarded, and new absurdities find frolic. That is, until the lowest common denominator is clued in that absurdity has resumed somewhere on the internet, and efforts are organized to fabricate outrage at its use.
Joeboy 7y ago
I'm sure there was a moment when "fake news" meant stories coming from superficially reputable looking websites, that in reality were fugaciously created to give a veneer of respectability to made up stories. This meaning of "fake news", which I think is actually meaningful and useful, seems to have completely vanished, or maybe I just imagined it?
- asark 7y ago
  It didn't vanish so much as it was vanished. Trump and friends calling anything they didn't like "fake news" effectively destroyed any utility or specificity the term may, briefly, have had. Brilliant move.
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  The term dates to the late 1980s when it referred to propagandistic video and audio "news releases" generally created by or for corporate interests. That usage continued through to mid-to-late 2000s decade. It was applied to more general misinformation in the 2010s, before being 'undefined' by many of the promotors and beneficiaries of fake news. https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fake_news https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fake_news https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary/ https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary/ https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/execsummary https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/execsummary

I'm a bit annoyed when people talk about "fake news" as if everyone understands what that means. It seems pretty clear to me that different people have different conceptions of what that is.

nothanksmydude 7y ago

One of the best ways to make me cringe is to use "fake news" as a joke in the completely wrong context. It physically hurts me to realize this every time it happens (which is unfortunately common) Not implying you are doing this, had to chime in tho cause it really does piss me off I should clarify that doing this on purpose isn't even remotely funny. It's the realiziation that they have an extremely incorrect understanding of the term that hurts

josteink 7y ago

It’s also interesting that those who popularized the term “fake news” (left wing politicians) used it to discredit their opposition, by claiming some sort of “collusion” between Trump and the Russians. And now that whole construct, which was reported on to great lengths by “real” news outlets, has been proven to be “fake news” as well. As in, the phenomenon of fake news was actually faked? Could this even be messier? No wonder nobody trusts anything anymore.

austincheney 7y ago
While everybody may use or abuse that term there is only person who popularized that term, to me, and that person does not claim to be left wing.
- Izkata 7y ago
  Trump may have popularized it, but Clinton created it [0], almost immediately after losing the election. [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42724320 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42724320
  - krapp 7y ago
    Clinton didn't create the term fake news. The article you link to mentions her having used the term in a speech, but that doesn't mean she created it, nor, as I assume we're meant to infer, that she or the Democratic Party fabricated the phenomenon referred to as a post-hoc rationalization for having lost the election. In fact, if you read the Wikipedia article on fake news[0], you'll note the term as well as the phenomenon predate Clinton's campaign and loss, even within that campaign cycle. People were talking about it well before that point. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fake_news
    - identity-haver 7y ago
      The term has existed, but was popularized and brought into the common discourse immediately after the 2016 election: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=fake%20news https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=f...
    - postHoc 7y ago
      But it really is a post-hoc rationalization for having lost the election. Just like the racist version of the pepe frog meme, and all of its subsequent variants were a form of Streisand effect, for having claimed as much. There wasn't much in the way of attachment for those particular memes, until the bumbling claim was made that they were being deployed in earnest as weapons, which hadn't been the case until after the claim was made. This process has been accelerating, with more absurdities and meaningless drivel being bastardized ironically, until intolerable, at which point the symbolism is galvanized, post-hoc, as a matador for emotional outrage. At which point it gets discarded, and new absurdities find frolic. That is, until the lowest common denominator is clued in that absurdity has resumed somewhere on the internet, and efforts are organized to fabricate outrage at its use.

Joeboy 7y ago

I'm sure there was a moment when "fake news" meant stories coming from superficially reputable looking websites, that in reality were fugaciously created to give a veneer of respectability to made up stories. This meaning of "fake news", which I think is actually meaningful and useful, seems to have completely vanished, or maybe I just imagined it?

asark 7y ago
It didn't vanish so much as it was vanished. Trump and friends calling anything they didn't like "fake news" effectively destroyed any utility or specificity the term may, briefly, have had. Brilliant move.
dredmorbius 7y ago
The term dates to the late 1980s when it referred to propagandistic video and audio "news releases" generally created by or for corporate interests. That usage continued through to mid-to-late 2000s decade. It was applied to more general misinformation in the 2010s, before being 'undefined' by many of the promotors and beneficiaries of fake news. https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fake_news https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fake_news https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary/ https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary/ https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/execsummary https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/execsummary