Author Topic: Fake news discussion. Aka trump supporters are gullible idiots (Read 15497 times)

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #50 on:** December 10, 2016, 02:25:46 PM »

Lib advisors confirm that WL's was legit = intolerant left ratcheting up the rage factor 250%. So pissed when they're exposed.

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #51 on:** December 11, 2016, 11:15:19 AM »

The 2013 NDAA that Obama signed ostensibly negates the Smith-Mundt act of 1948 aka the prohibition of the US gov't to propagandize the American people in the same exact ways they propagandize foreign countries/non US entities (like terrorist groups). This includes such things as . . . fake news stories.

Thanks Obama

renocat · « **Reply #52 on:** December 12, 2016, 09:17:56 AM »

Gullible? Yes, but we makeup dang better stories than prissy lib journalists who take facts and distort them to prove their point or to create falsehoods about hocum scum cretins that live in the hinterlands.

Dugout DickStone · « **Reply #53 on:** December 12, 2016, 09:43:39 AM »

Quote from: renocat on December 12, 2016, 09:17:56 AM

Gullible? Yes, but we makeup dang better stories than prissy lib journalists who take facts and distort them to prove their point or to create falsehoods about hocum scum cretins that live in the hinterlands.

agreed 100%

chum1 · « **Reply #54 on:** December 28, 2016, 07:32:40 PM »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2016/12/28/americans-especially-but-not-exclusively-trump-voters-believe-crazy-wrong-things

renocat · « **Reply #55 on:** December 29, 2016, 09:11:00 AM »

Hillary and her hatin' harlots made up horsecrap story one after another. Gullible press regurgitated the crap on the plates of American voters. They tried to paint Trump as a crazed woman groper and.rapist. I am glad Hillary got rolled.

chum1 · « **Reply #56 on:** December 30, 2016, 01:46:37 PM »

https://twitter.com/HashtagGriswold/status/814846770257756160

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #57 on:** December 30, 2016, 01:54:04 PM »

you'll be SHOCKED

star seed 7 · « **Reply #58 on:** December 30, 2016, 02:11:35 PM »

fsd's dementia does not process sarcasm

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #59 on:** December 30, 2016, 06:24:16 PM »

IRONY

Lib7, you precious little simpleton. Don't change. Such a wonderful symbol for the libtarded.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #60 on:** January 04, 2017, 12:21:45 PM »

Quote

IN THE PAST six weeks, the Washington Post published two blockbuster stories about the Russian threat that went viral: one on how Russia is behind a massive explosion of “fake news,” the other on how it invaded the U.S. electric grid. Both articles were fundamentally false. Each now bears a humiliating editor’s note grudgingly acknowledging that the core claims of the story were fiction: The first note was posted a full two weeks later to the top of the original article; the other was buried the following day at the bottom.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/04/washpost-is-richly-rewarded-for-false-news-about-russia-threat-while-public-is-deceived/

CNS · « **Reply #61 on:** January 04, 2017, 12:25:38 PM »

In the day and age where being first on line matters more than being accurate, this kind of bullshit is something we may never get around. Truth and perception have always been pretty mumped, but now its much easier to eff.

star seed 7 · « **Reply #62 on:** January 04, 2017, 12:27:46 PM »

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess theintercept.com is guilty of more fake news and less retractions/corrections than the Washington post

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #63 on:** January 04, 2017, 12:40:59 PM »

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on January 04, 2017, 12:27:46 PM

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess theintercept.com is guilty of more fake news and less retractions/corrections than the Washington post

Well, okay then. WaPo a publication of record (now relegated to a psychotic teenage girl slamming the bedroom door and throwing herself on the bed) is publishing less fake news! 'Grats WaPo!

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #64 on:** January 04, 2017, 12:52:15 PM »

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on January 04, 2017, 12:27:46 PM

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess theintercept.com is guilty of more fake news and less retractions/corrections than the Washington post

Well than you would love the National Enquirer.

Cartierfor3 · « **Reply #65 on:** January 04, 2017, 05:14:42 PM »

so tired of the term fake news

CNS · « **Reply #66 on:** January 04, 2017, 06:45:48 PM »

That's fine. What should we call it?

wetwillie · « **Reply #67 on:** January 04, 2017, 06:58:37 PM »

Lies

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #68 on:** January 04, 2017, 07:01:10 PM »

Propaganda

Tobias · « **Reply #69 on:** January 04, 2017, 07:02:31 PM »

alt news

Mrs. Gooch · « **Reply #70 on:** January 04, 2017, 07:14:33 PM »

Faux news

star seed 7 · « **Reply #71 on:** January 04, 2017, 08:04:13 PM »

Quote from: Tobias on January 04, 2017, 07:02:31 PM

alt news

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #72 on:** January 04, 2017, 08:14:19 PM »

Quote

WaPo

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #73 on:** January 05, 2017, 08:10:51 AM »

satire

K-S-U-Wildcats! · « **Reply #74 on:** January 05, 2017, 09:09:59 AM »

The name depends upon the motivation behind the lies and misinformation. If it's just to gin up web traffic for ad revenue, it's called "clickbait." If the purpose is also to advance a political agenda it's called "propaganda."

The term "fake news" is itself propaganda, put out there by liberal journalists trying to suggest that they should be the arbiters of what news is real and fake, which is pretty laughable coming from news organizations that are in the business of propaganda.