FAKE NEWS EXPOSED: A Service of PoliticalChat.com

[whell]

Originally Posted by Oerets

Accredited news backs up their stories with facts and names on record.
Barney

Give me a break! Show me how the NY Times backed up their story with names on the record for the NY Times in this story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us...hack.html?_r=1

Newspapers and broadcast news are all about quoting "top officials" and sources who only speak on the condition that they remain anonymous.

[donquixote99]

There are names on the by-line. They get fired if they are shown to have made anything up.

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

There are names on the by-line. They get fired if they are shown to have made anything up.

Cow manure. Folks like Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair get away with it for years before anything catches up to them. Brian Williams gets recycled from NBC to MSNBC. Fareed Zakaria gets to his own show on CNN as a reward for plagiarism.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

You're such a clueless tool. Look what you posted:

German judges and state prosecutors need to crack down straight away on fake news disseminated through social media platforms such as Facebook, Germany's Justice Minister Heiko Maas said in an interview published on Sunday.

The call here is not JUST about dealing with folks saying nasty things about each other on Facebook. The Justice Minister as saying he thinks German judges and state prosecutors need to sift through Facebook posts and police the content. How do you think this will happen? What does the process look like? Who gets to decide what gets prosecuted and what doesn't? Who make the rules? Just like in any bureaucracy, it won't be the law that provides the boundaries. It will be individuals making the rules and creating the processes whereby "offenders" will be identified and prosecuted.

In a way, this is poetic justice. Zuckerberg supported folks who think like this in the most recent election. We thankfully didn't let them near the White House in this election, but Zuckerberg may someday have to deal with this in Europe. Won't that interesting to watch?

The bolded words were from the article, not from me. Moreover, the article makes clear in the last two paragraphs that Germany expects Facebook to police their content, not for the German government to do it. You sure do get spun up about stuff you don't understand.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Give me a break! Show me how the NY Times backed up their story with names on the record for the NY Times in this story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us...hack.html?_r=1

Newspapers and broadcast news are all about quoting "top officials" and sources who only speak on the condition that they remain anonymous.

For the last time, the NYTimes article was factually correct. The CIA does indeed believe that Russia was behind it in an effort to harm Hillary, exactly as the Times reported. There's is not even a whiff of fake news in the article. Meanwhile, your Dear Leader lies with impunity, praises Alex Jones, his National Security Advisor tweets conspiracy theories, and Trump puts Bannon, one of the biggest purveyors of fake news, as a key White House advisor. You're piece of work, Whell, and seem to have bought into far right projection and propaganda.

Facebook acknowledges the problem with fake news on its site and has launched steps to try to stop it. http://www.ibtimes.com/facebook-vs-f...wsfeed-2461285

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Cow manure. Folks like Stephen Glass and Jayson Blair get away with it for years before anything catches up to them. Brian Williams gets recycled from NBC to MSNBC. Fareed Zakaria gets to his own show on CNN as a reward for plagiarism.

The culture of ethics I refer to does exist in print journalism. Rarely, clever people evade the system, but the way the way the print journalism industry reacted when the problems were uncovered shows that corruption is not general, as you suggest.

TV news emulates the standards of print journalism, at best, imperfectly.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The bolded words were from the article, not from me. Moreover, the article makes clear in the last two paragraphs that Germany expects Facebook to police their content, not for the German government to do it. You sure do get spun up about stuff you don't understand.

Yes, but YOU picked the section of the article you wanted to quote. And before you backpedal too far, the article YOU linked to has the following headline:

"German courts should go after fake news on Facebook now: minister" Which means, in case you fail to understand the magnitude of the headline, the Justice Minister of Germany is urging German prosecutors and courts get more aggressive in this area, REGARDLESS of what Facebook might or might not do to "police itself".

From the article you linked to:

"Justice authorities must prosecute that, even on the internet," he (Maas) said, noting that offenders could face up to five years in jail. "Anyone who tries to manipulate the political discussion with lies needs to be aware (of the consequences)."

The issue of fake news has taken on new urgency after warnings by German and U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia has sought to influence elections and sway public opinion.

German government officials have expressed concern that fake news could influence the parliamentary election expected in September, in which Merkel will run for a fourth term.


The first part that I highlighted above: unlike Germany - the constitution in this country protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press, and very specifically was crafted to so that POLITICAL SPEECH was protected. You stated at the end of your quote that "it seems that the ever logical Germans are able to recognize what fake news is and isn't." Well, it looks like the "ever logical" Germans want to specifically get aggressive with controlling political speech on the internet - particularly when they can leverage the weight of the government's prosecutorial power on an entity like Facebook where private citizens can be identified and targeted. And we then see that the driver is probably not "defamation laws" as much as it is Merkel's re-election.

I'm sure that Merkel and Maas would likely benefit greatly from controlling "fake news", like observations that her lax immigration policies may have contributed to increased terrorist activity in Germany. I fear the incident in Berlin today may turn out to be another sad example.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

I'm sure that Merkel and Maas would likely benefit greatly from controlling "fake news", like observations that her lax immigration policies may have contributed to increased terrorist activity in Germany.

Articles about immigration problems and terrorism in Germany aren't fake news and that's not what this is about. They concerned about the concocted gibberish that you refuse to even acknowledge exists. Once again, you're demonstrating your abject obtuseness as to what constitutes fake news.

In this country, the GOP and Trump are the great beneficiaries of fake news. Accordingly, they, like you, are the ones twisting the argument 180 degrees by calling actual news unfavorable to Trump fake while dismissing the existence of the fake news that the GOP and its minions sling each and every day on talk radio, Breitbart, InfoWars, etc and broadcast via Twitter by Trump and his staff. You've bought into this silly meme hook, line and sinker. Try as you might, nobody else here is buying the line of shit you're selling. You sound like a mindless dittohead.

[d-ray657]

I should note here that the title of this thread is false and misleading. The nonsense presented by the OP is in no way a service of nor is it endorsed by Politicalchat.org. If the OP wants to flatter himself by saying that his posts are a service to Politicalchat, he can fantasize all he wants. But, I suppose it is asking too much to expect him to be honest about what he is offering.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Articles about immigration problems and terrorism in Germany aren't fake news and that's not what this is about. They concerned about the concocted gibberish that you refuse to even acknowledge exists. Once again, you're demonstrating your abject obtuseness as to what constitutes fake news.

In this country, the GOP and Trump are the great beneficiaries of fake news. Accordingly, they, like you, are the ones twisting the argument 180 degrees by calling actual news unfavorable to Trump fake while dismissing the existence of the fake news that the GOP and its minions sling each and every day on talk radio, Breitbart, InfoWars, etc and broadcast via Twitter by Trump and his staff. You've bought into this silly meme hook, line and sinker. Try as you might, nobody else here is buying the line of shit you're selling. You sound like a mindless dittohead.

That's exactly what this is about, and thank you for confirming it. Obama alluded to it a few weeks ago suggesting there should be a "filter" on the news. Now here comes Merkel and company with an election coming up, and she wants a filter as well. How quaint.

Fake news is the left's latest attempt at censorship. Period. Take a news story that the left doesn't like and simply label it fake news. Someone in the press has an unflattering story? Label them a purveyor of fake news. Who gets to decide what fake news is? Of course, our friends on the left. Who are the "approved sources" of non fake news? Of course the same news sources that are routinely in the tank for the left. Lovely.