5 ms·
Yes, let's go back to when only the press could lie.
by zlakb 7y ago
Yes, let's go back to when only the press could lie.
- baq 7y agoyes, please. that's better than now.
- Kurtz79 7y agoPress can be made accountable for what it reports to a large extent, outright lies can be called out and the newspaper or whoever signs the byline can be sued in extreme cases. An anonymous fake news article has no risk or accountability for its author, that's the main difference.
- A2017U1 7y agoWhen was the last time a journalist lost their jobs for printing blatantly false information?
- Loughla 7y agoWhen was the last time a major journalist printed blatantly false information?
- 54635124gddd 7y agoIt happens regularly. https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/26/media/cnn-announcement-retracted-article/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/26/media/cnn-announcement-retr... https://www.foxnews.com/us/reporter-resigns-after-false-tweet-that-maryland-shooting-suspect-had-maga-hat https://www.foxnews.com/us/reporter-resigns-after-false-twee... These were on the first page of results when I duckducko'ed (duckduckwent?) "journalist resigned false"
- TeMPOraL 7y agoWith press, at least everyone is reading the same lies. Hyper-targeted fake news makes it impossible to discuss anything, because across groups, everyone has their own set of "facts", making people talk past each other.
- zlakb 7y agoYes, because there's only one TV channel and one newspaper.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoFor any given news story, there are usually few "traditional" sources covering it, with only a fraction of them being widely popular. It's a manageable amount. Social media has switched the way people consume news (and content in general) - they're no longer consumed on per-source basis, but on per-story basis. I.e. most people don't read a particular news site, they read whatever stories from whatever sources happen to be on their Reddit or Facebook feed.