Fake News

28 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Fake News

'I want to quit': Fox News employees say their network's Russia coverage was 'an embarrassment'

 

Some employees at Fox News were left embarrassed and humiliated by their network's coverage of the latest revelations in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian election meddling, according to conversations CNN had with several individuals placed throughout the network.

"I'm watching now and screaming," one Fox News personality said in a text message to CNN as the person watched their network's coverage. "I want to quit."

"It is another blow to journalists at Fox who come in every day wanting to cover the news in a fair and objective way," one senior Fox News employee told CNN of their outlet's coverage, adding that there were "many eye rolls" in the newsroom over how the news was covered.

The person said, "Fox feels like an extension of the Trump White House."

The employees spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the matter. A Fox News spokesperson told CNN the network covered the breaking news accurately and fairly across both news and opinion programming.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/31/media/fox-news-employees-russia-mueller-...

NorthReport

White House wants credit for Papadopoulos arrest

Sarah Huckabee Sanders claimed that Mueller’s probe brought down Papadopoulos only because of White House cooperation.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/31/trump-robert-mueller-indictmen...

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport

Facebook Is Still In Denial About Fake News

 Mark Zuckerberg’s company is trying to tell Congress—and the American public—that its ads are not especially effective.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-31/facebook-is-still-in-...

NorthReport

Ukraine says it warned Facebook of Russia fake news in 2015

Social media site denies it failed to act on complaint about Moscow’s ‘propaganda war’

https://www.ft.com/content/c63d76d4-bd1e-11e7-b8a3-38a6e068f464

NorthReport

Russian fake accounts showed posts to 126 million Facebook users

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2017/10/30/russian-fake-accounts-sho...

NorthReport

More fake news to attempt to save his presidency?

A Desperate Republican Scheme to Save Donald Trump

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/a-desperate-republican-sch...

josh

Conservative media’s attack on special counsel Robert Mueller was in the works far before Mueller brought indictments against high-level Trump campaign officials.

https://www.vox.com/2017/10/31/16571350/fox-news-mueller-credibility

NorthReport

 

 

Trump’s has the winning batting average: since he became President Trump has made 2.8 false claims a day

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2017/11/01/daniel-dales-donald-trump-fact-check-updates.html

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport

Even Fox News Has Grown Tired Of Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ Lying

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EsYg6W8q-M

NDPP

"Edward S Herman, perhaps most famous for writing 'Manufacturing Consent' and other books with Noam Chomsky, has died. His last piece appears to have been 'Fake News on Russia and Other Official Enemies'..."

https://twitter.com/samhusseini/status/930182430153158656

Mobo2000

RIP, Ed Herman.    Used to read his stuff regularly on zmag back in the day.   Here's the link to his last article:

https://monthlyreview.org/2017/07/01/fake-news-on-russia-and-other-offic...

Mobo2000

... and a nice article by Matt Taibbi on the death of Ed Herman and the need for a new "Manufacturing Consent":

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/matt-taibbi-on-the-death-o...

"The main reasons for this have to do with the structure of the current commercial media. Because of tech companies like Google and Facebook, it is significantly easier to "manufacture" consent today than it was before.

A small handful of monopolistic tech companies like Facebook have life-or-death power over media companies. They can steer traffic wherever they please simply by tweaking their algorithms. Firms that don't themselves create news content wield this monstrous influence.

Controlling how, where and when you got the news was how media companies were paid previously. Since those processes are mostly out of their hands now, news companies no longer control their own economic fates.

They have become vassals to essentially unregulated, monopolistic distribution mechanisms like Facebook, who additionally appropriate the lion's share of the profits that used to fund things like investigative journalism.

Moreover the policing mechanisms are far more powerful now. Herman and Chomsky wrote about flak in the era before social media. Today blowback against dissenting thought is instantaneous and massive."

NorthReport

For Trump and his supporters, the phrase 'fake news' is their most potent weapon: Neil Macdonald

I never anticipated there would come a time when there'd be no set of basic, agreed upon facts

 

Sean Hannity, the Donald Trump adviser who masquerades as a political journalist on Fox News when it suits him, got up on his hind legs recently to scold CNN's Jake Tapper, who is a real journalist and former White House correspondent, a fellow who actually has to follow the norms and rules of the craft, such as they are.

 

Basically, that means Tapper would be fired for knowingly telling a lie on air, whereas Hannity presumably counsels President Trump on making them up.

 

Hannity's issue with Tapper that night was foolishness – something about how horrible it was of Tapper to say, on air, just after a man shouting Allahu Akbar had mowed down several Manhattan pedestrians with a rented truck, that Allahu Akbar is a phrase sometimes uttered as a beautiful sentiment, and has been corrupted by bad people.

 

What caught my interest was the way Hannity set up the CNN-loves-terrorists smear: "You have liberal fake news CNN's fake-Jake Tapper," he explained in his pained, self-righteous tone. 

Unleashing the angry id

 

It was crude and puerile. But then, like the president he advises, Hannity is unconcerned with grownup language (or even proper spelling). He instead packs his sentences with emotives and epithets designed to stimulate the angry id. He and Trump are linguistic gunsmiths, and the phrase "fake news" is their most potent weapon.

 

 

 

In the bumper-sticker realm of Trump Nation, it's the etymological equivalent of a Bushmaster with a bump stock; turn it on your enemy and spray. It's particularly handy for dealing with inconvenient facts. Just nock a fake-news arrow onto your bowstring, aim it at your tormentor and let the exploding head tear into truth and reality.

 

Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump

When will all the haters and fools out there realize that having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. There always playing politics - bad for our country. I want to solve North Korea, Syria, Ukraine, terrorism, and Russia can greatly help!

4:18 PM - Nov 11, 2017 · Vietnam

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

Climate change is fake news. Collusion with Russia is definitely fake news, and gets faker with every guilty plea and criminal indictment of Trump campaign aides, and every new account of them meeting with people they thought represented Russia and had dirt on Hillary. The poor attendance at Trump's inauguration, documented by aerial photographs set beside those of Barack Obama's big day, was fake news. Multiple accusations of sexual harassment against Trump himself are fake news. Fake, fake, fake.

 

In a masterpiece of theatrical irony, Trump himself actually claims to have invented the phrase. Remember, this is the guy who for years pushed the idea that Obama was born abroad, and that his parents covered it up. Or that Republican Sen. Ted Cruz's father was in league with Lee Harvey Oswald. Not for nothing has Trump declared his love of uneducated people.

 

Donald Trump

In a masterpiece of theatrical irony, Trump himself actually claims to have invented the phrase 'fake news.' (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/trump-fake-news-1.4400598

Mobo2000

The above piece is to my eye typical of the genre.   It is a polemic against Trump disguised as media criticism, but the media criticism is paper thin and missing the point.    It's largely a lament that the uneducated masses aren't as trusting as they used to be.  When the writer makes a relevant point he disregards the conclusions that come from it:

"The media is guilty of atrocious hypocrisy: we assign value to life based on race (disasters in the Third World usually merit coverage after the death toll rises above several thousand), reporters posing as experts repeat conventional wisdom, we insist on the delusion of objectivity, we often make it more about ourselves than the actual news, we are hopelessly bourgeois and we genuflect obsequiously to authority, all the time posing as stern watchdogs.

That has always been the case, though. There are poor reporters and brilliant ones. I've always had faith that educated readers and viewers (I love educated people) will identify and trust the best of us. Hence the New York Times and the Economist and the New Yorker and the Washington Post, among others."

The New York Times is one of the most widely studied media properties in the world.   It's reporting of Cambodia was featured heavily throughout Manufacturing Consent.   That the writer takes the NYT and Washington Post (!) as worthy objects of trust (for educated people) tells me all I need to know.   

 

Sean in Ottawa

The argument that is often made is that we have been lied to all along.

The truth is not at all supportive.

We have been rushing down a slippery slope where truth has been twisted and parts replaced with lies and a steady diet of interpretation that has become dogma in a culture without critical thing.

We reached a point where no longer would truth be required to distort and twist or paint over here and there. Now we are where it is not relevant and you can create an entire canvas of lies where there is no longer a need for truth. Seen numerically the truth has slid for a majority to a minority of content until it is no longer required in the manufacture of information and propaganda.

You cannot blame Trump for this entirely. The culture moved to the point that he recognized that truth was no longer a necessary ingredient.

This is an issue of global culture. Sure, some may be ahead of the others but this effect is related to many things including technology and information delivery so that you can be sure that no part of the world can avoid it. Most of all it is based on public demand. There is no strong public demand for truth.

When people did not employ critical thinking to determine truth from fact, they get rewarded by having the truth component taken away entirely as it is not needed any more.

Truth is like many things-- use it or lose it. A failure of critical thinking and lack of demand for truth, is the direct cause of abandonment of truth as a component of information.

NorthReport

If I want entertainment I'll watch SNL.

Trump-Russia investigation: Paul Manafort charges leave President's 'fake news' defence exposed

The Donald's common claims about the probe haven't added up so far

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-russia-inv...

NorthReport

It is this kind of nonsense which undermines the news. Good on Stephanie Ruhle for calling out this sicko.

Moore Lawyer Cites MSNBC Anchor Who Hails From Canada To Defend Candidate

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/moore-lawyer-children-get-consensu...

Mobo2000

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/11/16/the-honest-ads-act-fundamental-r...

"Hobert asserts, Americans have a ” fundamental right to know who is trying to influence our votes and our views on public policy.”

Well, no. Americans — and Russians — have a fundamental right to say what they want to say, with or without their names attached to it.

“Who the Author of this Production is,” reads an old political pamphlet, “is wholly unnecessary to the Public, as the Object for Attention is the Doctrine itself, not the Man.”

That old pamphlet is Common Sense, the manifesto of the American Revolution. We know its author’s name — Thomas Paine — now, but its first readers didn’t. From Cato’s Letters to The Federalist Papers, anonymous and pseudonymous political speech defined early American free speech in ideology and in practice.

There’s a right to speak. There’s a right to listen or not listen to what someone says. There’s a right to ask who’s saying it, and to condition one’s belief or non-belief on the answer. But that answer may be “none of your business,” and there’s no right to forcibly dictate otherwise.

Don’t let demagogues like McCain, Klobuchar, and Warner exploit the current moral panic to manufacture fake new rights at the expense of old real ones."

Sean in Ottawa

Mobo2000 wrote:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/11/16/the-honest-ads-act-fundamental-r...

"Hobert asserts, Americans have a ” fundamental right to know who is trying to influence our votes and our views on public policy.”

Well, no. Americans — and Russians — have a fundamental right to say what they want to say, with or without their names attached to it.

“Who the Author of this Production is,” reads an old political pamphlet, “is wholly unnecessary to the Public, as the Object for Attention is the Doctrine itself, not the Man.”

That old pamphlet is Common Sense, the manifesto of the American Revolution. We know its author’s name — Thomas Paine — now, but its first readers didn’t. From Cato’s Letters to The Federalist Papers, anonymous and pseudonymous political speech defined early American free speech in ideology and in practice.

There’s a right to speak. There’s a right to listen or not listen to what someone says. There’s a right to ask who’s saying it, and to condition one’s belief or non-belief on the answer. But that answer may be “none of your business,” and there’s no right to forcibly dictate otherwise.

Don’t let demagogues like McCain, Klobuchar, and Warner exploit the current moral panic to manufacture fake new rights at the expense of old real ones."

When information is designed to manipulate a result and it affects not only the listener but the behaviour of the listener who affects others, then this is not a fair comment.

When we are bombarded by messages, if there is a hand behind a large number of them, we have a right to know whose hand that belongs to. 

Individuals, with a low reach should be able to preserve their anonymity but when the reach is so broad that it will effect many people initially and then even more people through secondary reach and when it is an organization that can use economic power to shout over individuals, that is another story.

Yes, we have the right to determine if we want to believe something or not. That right includes the basics in giving information credibility -- knowing the source. We should not be put at disadvantage where experts create information that may not have any truth and manufacture it to pass our individualk defences or conceal the information that would allow us to understand it. To say otherwise is to stress the concept of consent without a requirement that there be an ability to have informed consent.

This is an article seeking permission to decieve and over power others in the information age. It is effectively asking for a coup given the power information has because no democracy can exist without reliable information and the strength of those that do exist lies in the strength of the information that underpins social consent. The fact that this article could be written and well received by a large number of people is an indication of a direction away from any democratic principle that has survived to this point.

NorthReport

So we can have more of this?

Sounds like comments from someone who gets their news from Fake, I mean, Fox News.

Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal

Inside the web of conspiracy theorists, Russian operatives, Trump campaigners and Twitter bots who manufactured the 'news' that Hillary Clinton ran a pizza-restaurant child-sex ring

 

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/pizzagate-anatomy-of-a-fake-ne...

Mobo2000 wrote:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/11/16/the-honest-ads-act-fundamental-r...

"Hobert asserts, Americans have a ” fundamental right to know who is trying to influence our votes and our views on public policy.”

Well, no. Americans — and Russians — have a fundamental right to say what they want to say, with or without their names attached to it.

“Who the Author of this Production is,” reads an old political pamphlet, “is wholly unnecessary to the Public, as the Object for Attention is the Doctrine itself, not the Man.”

That old pamphlet is Common Sense, the manifesto of the American Revolution. We know its author’s name — Thomas Paine — now, but its first readers didn’t. From Cato’s Letters to The Federalist Papers, anonymous and pseudonymous political speech defined early American free speech in ideology and in practice.

There’s a right to speak. There’s a right to listen or not listen to what someone says. There’s a right to ask who’s saying it, and to condition one’s belief or non-belief on the answer. But that answer may be “none of your business,” and there’s no right to forcibly dictate otherwise.

Don’t let demagogues like McCain, Klobuchar, and Warner exploit the current moral panic to manufacture fake new rights at the expense of old real ones."

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

So wait!  Counterpunch.org opposes cracking down on fake news??

I'm shocked.  Shocked!

NorthReport

A failed 'Swedish flag' hoax shows the decline of the extremist 4chan message board

By Mike Wendling

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-42003496