5 ms·

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 “c

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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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.

austincheney 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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 8y 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.