5 ms·

The term "Fake News" is an interesting one. It first described how news sites would pop up and spread totally false stories that would get social media users o

by Jonnax 7y ago

The term "Fake News" is an interesting one. It first described how news sites would pop up and spread totally false stories that would get social media users outraged to share it to their friends. However those that benefitted from the "fake news" realised that they could have all the advantage by calling those calling them out by saying "no u" Fake news in the context of dangerous lies like "You can make a more effective cleaner by mixing bleach and ammonia" is easy to call out. But political "fake news" is tricky. Those that are the beneficiaries of the fake news are often those in power and/or also have an influence on the media. So a law like that can easily be used to silence opposition. It's like anti-terror laws being used to go after vandals. It just becomes another tool.

mikekchar 7y ago
Just to be pedantic: Don't mix bleach and ammonia if you want to live. It produces a very toxic gas. Y'know... can't be too careful with people who might not read carefully ;-)
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  It does make an effective cleaner but you would have to be a complete idiot to do so.
  - gruez 7y ago
    Very toxic but also very effective? Why not use it outdoors only?
    - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      Because there are equally effective cleaners that are less hazardous to your health and the things being cleaned than concentrated chlorine. Sure you could use chlorine as a cleaner but the cost/benefit is not there outside some niche industrial applications where there's some specific pro that makes it worth all the extra cost.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
I find it interesting for a different reason. At the risk of sounding like these fake news peddlers, I see the problem like this: BULLSHIT SCALE |[------]----------[---------------]--> | | | | | the range people think | fake news | news publications | | operate in the range | they actually | operate in as close to truth as one could get That is, "fake news" is only a little bit worse than the stuff mainstream news publishes. It's different only because it dares to make that one extra step, cross the line and detach completely from reality. The goal of both is the same anyway - to drive ad impressions. To me, news publications writing about fake news is like pickpockets getting all outraged about muggers, who don't engage in the fine arts of trickery, and instead just hit their victim and take their wallet. They're just angry because they have competition. And I don't buy the argument that the contents of news is just innocent bias, and that everyone has one; when one publication makes a square look like a circle, and another makes it look like triangle, then that's taking it a bit too far. Evidence for my view is evident if you add up all the little things HN readers encounter regularly. For instance, it's a rare news article posted on HN (or in other relevant communities frequented by experts) that doesn't get thoroughly ripped apart when someone posts the original source behind it, or when someone who knows the topic first-hand or second-hand chimes in. Gell-Mann amnesia is a known phenomenon. The fact that you should always review articles quoting you prior to publications because journalists will misquote you, making you look like you believe the opposite of what you do, is a well-ingrained cultural meme, speaking to the ubiquity of the problem. Etc.
- forgingahead 7y ago
  It's different only because it dares to make that one extra step, cross the line and detach completely from reality. I get what your point, and generally sympathize, but unfortunately the "mainstream news" has already lost the plot in what they publish and broadcast with a straight face. The recent impeachment hearings were but the latest example, whereby the video of the hearings completely contradicted the paper headlines in the WSJ and ticker stream on CNN. The genie is out of the bottle; as in, there is no truth any longer about things far away from you. The only way to deal with this is to become smaller -- smaller in our communities and concerns, and focus on that. Not worrying about national politics, or nonsense happening in faraway countries, but about our own families, neighbourhoods, and communities. The smaller scale will mitigate a lot of the reality distortion that is currently occurring, plus it will make for better living standards all around.
jtms 7y ago
For most of the world, yes you are correct, but in Singapore it’s a moot point: any opposition is already quite effectively silenced.
- ValentineC 7y ago
  > but in Singapore it’s a moot point: any opposition is already quite effectively silenced Singaporean here. I don't think this is true, but the "fake news" law allows the government to set the terms for any political mudslinging.
unraveller 7y ago
When "fake news" is used dismissively to ridicule once widely trusted institutions then at least it implies individual assessment is alive and well and able to be improved. When the "intellectually superior" claim to be among the few who can detect "fake news" postings on the web it's time to worry. They can't tell the trolls from the believers so naturally, neither could anyone else EVER attain this skill. Intervention only gets prescribed to preserve their status quo.

by Jonnax 7y ago

mikekchar 7y ago

Just to be pedantic: Don't mix bleach and ammonia if you want to live. It produces a very toxic gas. Y'know... can't be too careful with people who might not read carefully ;-)

Nasrudith 7y ago
It does make an effective cleaner but you would have to be a complete idiot to do so.
- gruez 7y ago
  Very toxic but also very effective? Why not use it outdoors only?
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    Because there are equally effective cleaners that are less hazardous to your health and the things being cleaned than concentrated chlorine. Sure you could use chlorine as a cleaner but the cost/benefit is not there outside some niche industrial applications where there's some specific pro that makes it worth all the extra cost.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

I find it interesting for a different reason. At the risk of sounding like these fake news peddlers, I see the problem like this: BULLSHIT SCALE |[------]----------[---------------]--> | | | | | the range people think | fake news | news publications | | operate in the range | they actually | operate in as close to truth as one could get That is, "fake news" is only a little bit worse than the stuff mainstream news publishes. It's different only because it dares to make that one extra step, cross the line and detach completely from reality. The goal of both is the same anyway - to drive ad impressions. To me, news publications writing about fake news is like pickpockets getting all outraged about muggers, who don't engage in the fine arts of trickery, and instead just hit their victim and take their wallet. They're just angry because they have competition. And I don't buy the argument that the contents of news is just innocent bias, and that everyone has one; when one publication makes a square look like a circle, and another makes it look like triangle, then that's taking it a bit too far. Evidence for my view is evident if you add up all the little things HN readers encounter regularly. For instance, it's a rare news article posted on HN (or in other relevant communities frequented by experts) that doesn't get thoroughly ripped apart when someone posts the original source behind it, or when someone who knows the topic first-hand or second-hand chimes in. Gell-Mann amnesia is a known phenomenon. The fact that you should always review articles quoting you prior to publications because journalists will misquote you, making you look like you believe the opposite of what you do, is a well-ingrained cultural meme, speaking to the ubiquity of the problem. Etc.

forgingahead 7y ago
It's different only because it dares to make that one extra step, cross the line and detach completely from reality. I get what your point, and generally sympathize, but unfortunately the "mainstream news" has already lost the plot in what they publish and broadcast with a straight face. The recent impeachment hearings were but the latest example, whereby the video of the hearings completely contradicted the paper headlines in the WSJ and ticker stream on CNN. The genie is out of the bottle; as in, there is no truth any longer about things far away from you. The only way to deal with this is to become smaller -- smaller in our communities and concerns, and focus on that. Not worrying about national politics, or nonsense happening in faraway countries, but about our own families, neighbourhoods, and communities. The smaller scale will mitigate a lot of the reality distortion that is currently occurring, plus it will make for better living standards all around.

jtms 7y ago

For most of the world, yes you are correct, but in Singapore it’s a moot point: any opposition is already quite effectively silenced.

ValentineC 7y ago
> but in Singapore it’s a moot point: any opposition is already quite effectively silenced Singaporean here. I don't think this is true, but the "fake news" law allows the government to set the terms for any political mudslinging.

unraveller 7y ago

When "fake news" is used dismissively to ridicule once widely trusted institutions then at least it implies individual assessment is alive and well and able to be improved. When the "intellectually superior" claim to be among the few who can detect "fake news" postings on the web it's time to worry. They can't tell the trolls from the believers so naturally, neither could anyone else EVER attain this skill. Intervention only gets prescribed to preserve their status quo.