Predicting a Clinton win wasn't fake news, it was based on the polling information at the time.
True, but moving forward, news outlets basing future predictions using the same poling methods are pretty invalid sources of accurate information, right? How does all of this carry over to favorability ratings, public opinion on certain issues, etc?
Predicting a Clinton win wasn't fake news, it was based on the polling information at the time.
True, but moving forward, news outlets basing future predictions using the same poling methods are pretty invalid sources of accurate information, right? How does all of this carry over to favorability ratings, public opinion on certain issues, etc?
You'll hear in 2020 whether or not we'll be able to trust the presidential polling info, and that's understandable. It's different than favorability and opinions in that one asks what were going to do in the future, and another asks our current opinion. We love sharing our opinion on what we like and what sucks because that's how we can get coke classic.
the sad part is people are determining what is fact based on their biases ...
people are so indoctrinated that they can't think critically anymore ... that's why it's soooo easy to convince people of things ...
What else can people do? Unless you intentionally surround yourself with an environment of total confirmation bias....even if you think critically and have endless hours to do an in-depth fact check of every story, you are bound to find yourself confused as fuck and picking a source to believe.. I follow mostly left-leaning, or contrarian news sources...the contrarian sources are often aligned with viewpoints of the right - which is natural when the supposed left party has been in power for 8 years. I read both sides of a story and end up thinking EVERYONE is fucking lying. Focusing on the false dichotomy and nuances between the two parties/media angles (or in the bigger picture, the viewpoints of two nation-states) is a huge part of the problems we are having with information these days - myself included (awareness has to help...right?). Both parties are right-centre, and flip between neo-lib and neo-con in regards to foreign policy, depending on the strength of their target and risk/reward. So all we are doing is allowing these assholes to divide us over minutiae that completely misses the point.
Pretending 'the left' doesn't do this is disingenuous - assuming that traditional mainstream sources can be called left (they are all 100% government mouthpiece these days, so calling those stations 'left' when there is very little 'left' about the US government is false, but whatever).....All of the traditional mainstream sources have been guilty of exaggeration or outright lies - usually passed to them by unidentified government sources). Stories about GWB's IQ and national guard duty, stories of news anchor helicopter crashes, assigning blame for shootings and terror attacks without any verification, endless race baiting, manipulating stories about elections, torture in Iraq, numbers at (or the nature of) protests, whitewashing Israeli or Saudi or other allies human rights violations etc...and then there are the more blatant ones: the white helmet narratives, faking a bombing in Syria recently, faking hospital scenes after chemical attacks in Syria a couple years ago, running with a false, anti-Russian theme in regards to sniper shootings in Ukraine, running with Colin Powell's UN bullshit, running with the Kuwaiti incubator stories, completely ignoring stories that don't fit govt narratives (Standing Rock).... I mean....former CIA head Bush sr ended Operation Mockingbird? hahahahaha....ok. These days, the CIA openly consults with hollywood to make military movies and twist history.
The rush to be the first to break a story is part of the problem. Keeping corp donors and owners happy is another. Personal ambition is another (a Washington Post writer once won a pulitzer for a story he admitted to making up). Lies by omission are the calling card of 'both sides' of the media; aligning yourself with one or the other, or believing a story based on the source is...uh...not bright...but then, neither are most readers/viewers. There is nothing you can do to help a person willing to form an opinion based on a headline, or without knowing a thing about the source. I'm more worried about the people who take the time to investigate and find a whole bunch of bullshit from supposedly reputable sources.
^^^ You said " I'm more worried about the people who take the time to investigate and find a whole bunch of bullshit from supposedly reputable sources.
What do you mean? Unless you find this question amusing and don't want to answer for a year.
...and that would be why even when you're not doing the passive aggressive trolling routine, I still don't know how to take you. What don't you understand about that statement?
I thought in relation to fake news this was interesting as well. And aggravating. It is a 11 minute video, but oh boy... Never heard of that before today. This is the company that started working for Ted Cruz and then for Tronald Dump. It is a bit scary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8Dd5aVXLCc
Please, Pearl Jam, consider a Benaroya Hall vinyl reissue!
^^^ Do you mean the people who dig for truth are the ones to watch for?
To an extent, I suppose...but generally speaking, I meant they're the ones who shouldn't have their opinions manipulated by 'trusted' news sources. It's worrisome that a person can be an interested, critical thinking, fact-checking, voting citizen, but still be unwittingly misinformed. The ones who can't even be bothered to read an article or see if the site they're reading is a parody site, or if the author is 'reputable'? Fuck 'em.
the sad part is people are determining what is fact based on their biases ...
people are so indoctrinated that they can't think critically anymore ... that's why it's soooo easy to convince people of things ...
What else can people do? Unless you intentionally surround yourself with an environment of total confirmation bias....even if you think critically and have endless hours to do an in-depth fact check of every story, you are bound to find yourself confused as fuck and picking a source to believe.. I follow mostly left-leaning, or contrarian news sources...the contrarian sources are often aligned with viewpoints of the right - which is natural when the supposed left party has been in power for 8 years. I read both sides of a story and end up thinking EVERYONE is fucking lying. Focusing on the false dichotomy and nuances between the two parties/media angles (or in the bigger picture, the viewpoints of two nation-states) is a huge part of the problems we are having with information these days - myself included (awareness has to help...right?). Both parties are right-centre, and flip between neo-lib and neo-con in regards to foreign policy, depending on the strength of their target and risk/reward. So all we are doing is allowing these assholes to divide us over minutiae that completely misses the point.
Pretending 'the left' doesn't do this is disingenuous - assuming that traditional mainstream sources can be called left (they are all 100% government mouthpiece these days, so calling those stations 'left' when there is very little 'left' about the US government is false, but whatever).....All of the traditional mainstream sources have been guilty of exaggeration or outright lies - usually passed to them by unidentified government sources). Stories about GWB's IQ and national guard duty, stories of news anchor helicopter crashes, assigning blame for shootings and terror attacks without any verification, endless race baiting, manipulating stories about elections, torture in Iraq, numbers at (or the nature of) protests, whitewashing Israeli or Saudi or other allies human rights violations etc...and then there are the more blatant ones: the white helmet narratives, faking a bombing in Syria recently, faking hospital scenes after chemical attacks in Syria a couple years ago, running with a false, anti-Russian theme in regards to sniper shootings in Ukraine, running with Colin Powell's UN bullshit, running with the Kuwaiti incubator stories, completely ignoring stories that don't fit govt narratives (Standing Rock).... I mean....former CIA head Bush sr ended Operation Mockingbird? hahahahaha....ok. These days, the CIA openly consults with hollywood to make military movies and twist history.
The rush to be the first to break a story is part of the problem. Keeping corp donors and owners happy is another. Personal ambition is another (a Washington Post writer once won a pulitzer for a story he admitted to making up). Lies by omission are the calling card of 'both sides' of the media; aligning yourself with one or the other, or believing a story based on the source is...uh...not bright...but then, neither are most readers/viewers. There is nothing you can do to help a person willing to form an opinion based on a headline, or without knowing a thing about the source. I'm more worried about the people who take the time to investigate and find a whole bunch of bullshit from supposedly reputable sources.
Yes! Excellent post. Season 5 of The Wire hits on this on a municipal level and that was before the social media explosion. The real problems get passed over for sensationalized or non news items because they aren't easily digested and must be dealt with.
I know a lot of people who have just stopped listening or looking for the real news because it's difficult to find. It's frustrating because it is going to be our downfall if we don't course correct.
We are at the golden age of mass global information (fake and true) and the next 4 years will determine a lot for the future of politics, media and modes of official communication.
Predicting a Clinton win wasn't fake news, it was based on the polling information at the time.
True, but moving forward, news outlets basing future predictions using the same poling methods are pretty invalid sources of accurate information, right? How does all of this carry over to favorability ratings, public opinion on certain issues, etc?
The polling was correct except for PA, MI and WI....hardly fake and not that far off. The national polls were right on.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
I thought in relation to fake news this was interesting as well. And aggravating. It is a 11 minute video, but oh boy... Never heard of that before today. This is the company that started working for Ted Cruz and then for Tronald Dump. It is a bit scary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8Dd5aVXLCc
ya ... it's why I keep saying that they way things are now has been purposeful ... that the manipulation of the social construct has been done in the interests of corporate interests for a long time now ...
SEC 501.Committee to counter active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence over peoples and governments (a)Definitions In this section:
(1)Active measures by Russia to exert covert influence The term active measures by Russia to exert covert influence means activities intended to influence a person or government that are carried out in coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly, including the following:
(A)Establishment or funding of a front group. (B)Covert broadcasting. (C)Media manipulation. (D)Disinformation and forgeries. (E)Funding agents of influence. (F)Incitement and offensive counterintelligence. (G)Assassinations. (H)Terrorist acts. (2)Appropriate committees of Congress The term appropriate committees of Congress means—
(A)the congressional intelligence committees; (B)the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate; and (C)the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives. (b)Establishment There is established within the executive branch an interagency committee to counter active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence.
(c)Membership (1)In general (A)Appointment Each head of an agency or department of the United States Government set out under subparagraph (B) shall appoint one member of the committee established by subsection (b) from among officials of such agency or department who occupy a position that is required to be appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(B)Head of an agency or department The head of an agency or department of the United States Government set out under this subparagraph are the following:
(i)The Director of National Intelligence. (ii)The Secretary of State. (iii)The Secretary of Defense. (iv)The Secretary of the Treasury. (v)The Attorney General. (vi)The Secretary of Energy. (vii)The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. (viii)The head of any other agency or department of the United States Government designated by the President for purposes of this section. (d)Meetings The committee shall meet on a regular basis.
(e)Duties The duties of the committee established by subsection (b) shall be as follows:
(1)To counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence, including by exposing falsehoods, agents of influence, corruption, human rights abuses, terrorism, and assassinations carried out by the security services or political elites of the Russian Federation or their proxies. (2)Such other duties as the President may designate for purposes of this section. (f)Staff The committee established by subsection (b) may employ such staff as the members of such committee consider appropriate.
(g)Budget request A request for funds required for the functioning of the committee established by subsection (b) may be included in each budget for a fiscal year submitted by the President pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code.
(h)Annual report (1)Requirement Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, and consistent with the protection of intelligence sources and methods, the committee established by subsection (b) shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report describing steps being taken by the committee to counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence.
(2)Matters included Each report under paragraph (1) shall include a summary of the following:
(A)Active measures by Russia to exert covert influence during the previous year, including significant incidents and notable trends. (B)Key initiatives of the committee. (C)Implementation of the committee’s initiatives by the heads of the agencies and departments of the United States Government specified in subsection (c)(1)(B). (D)Analysis of the success of such initiatives. (E)Changes to such initiatives from the previous year. (3)Separate reporting requirement The requirement to submit an annual report under paragraph (1) is in addition to any other reporting requirements with respect to Russia.
It's hilarious the The Trump loving snowflakes are complaining about fake news while they salivate over Breitfart, Alex Jones and FoKKK News. Wrong is right and right is wrong in Uneducatedmoronland.
It's a shame I share the same first name as Jones.
It's hilarious the The Trump loving snowflakes are complaining about fake news while they salivate over Breitfart, Alex Jones and FoKKK News. Wrong is right and right is wrong in Uneducatedmoronland.
It's a shame I share the same first name as Jones.
Haha, and I share the same last name as Jones, and yeah, I don't like it.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
It's hilarious the The Trump loving snowflakes are complaining about fake news while they salivate over Breitfart, Alex Jones and FoKKK News. Wrong is right and right is wrong in Uneducatedmoronland.
It's a shame I share the same first name as Jones.
agree, you would think by now the snowflakes would know that referencing breit AJ and Faux only diminishes any point they are trying to make! speaking of faux where the GF been?
It's hilarious the The Trump loving snowflakes are complaining about fake news while they salivate over Breitfart, Alex Jones and FoKKK News. Wrong is right and right is wrong in Uneducatedmoronland.
It's a shame I share the same first name as Jones.
agree, you would think by now the snowflakes would know that referencing breit AJ and Faux only diminishes any point they are trying to make! speaking of faux where the GF been?
A lot of those folks were put on hiatus after the election for various posts. I'm sure they'll be quieter when they return, just like a bush jr. voter after the consensus was that Iraq was a big mistake.
Comments
Pretending 'the left' doesn't do this is disingenuous - assuming that traditional mainstream sources can be called left (they are all 100% government mouthpiece these days, so calling those stations 'left' when there is very little 'left' about the US government is false, but whatever).....All of the traditional mainstream sources have been guilty of exaggeration or outright lies - usually passed to them by unidentified government sources). Stories about GWB's IQ and national guard duty, stories of news anchor helicopter crashes, assigning blame for shootings and terror attacks without any verification, endless race baiting, manipulating stories about elections, torture in Iraq, numbers at (or the nature of) protests, whitewashing Israeli or Saudi or other allies human rights violations etc...and then there are the more blatant ones: the white helmet narratives, faking a bombing in Syria recently, faking hospital scenes after chemical attacks in Syria a couple years ago, running with a false, anti-Russian theme in regards to sniper shootings in Ukraine, running with Colin Powell's UN bullshit, running with the Kuwaiti incubator stories, completely ignoring stories that don't fit govt narratives (Standing Rock)....
I mean....former CIA head Bush sr ended Operation Mockingbird? hahahahaha....ok. These days, the CIA openly consults with hollywood to make military movies and twist history.
The rush to be the first to break a story is part of the problem. Keeping corp donors and owners happy is another. Personal ambition is another (a Washington Post writer once won a pulitzer for a story he admitted to making up).
Lies by omission are the calling card of 'both sides' of the media; aligning yourself with one or the other, or believing a story based on the source is...uh...not bright...but then, neither are most readers/viewers. There is nothing you can do to help a person willing to form an opinion based on a headline, or without knowing a thing about the source. I'm more worried about the people who take the time to investigate and find a whole bunch of bullshit from supposedly reputable sources.
President-elect Trump agrees w/ most of your opinion.
Is he not on your mind?
You said " I'm more worried about the people who take the time to investigate and find a whole bunch of bullshit from supposedly reputable sources.
What do you mean?
Unless you find this question amusing and don't want to answer for a year.
Do you mean the people who dig for truth are the ones to watch for?
I know a lot of people who have just stopped listening or looking for the real news because it's difficult to find. It's frustrating because it is going to be our downfall if we don't course correct.
We are at the golden age of mass global information (fake and true) and the next 4 years will determine a lot for the future of politics, media and modes of official communication.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
http://www.activistpost.com/2016/12/bill-targeting-russian-propaganda-passes-house.html
SEC 501.Committee to counter active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence over peoples and governments
(a)Definitions
In this section:
(1)Active measures by Russia to exert covert influence
The term active measures by Russia to exert covert influence means activities intended to influence a person or government that are carried out in coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly, including the following:
(A)Establishment or funding of a front group.
(B)Covert broadcasting.
(C)Media manipulation.
(D)Disinformation and forgeries.
(E)Funding agents of influence.
(F)Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
(G)Assassinations.
(H)Terrorist acts.
(2)Appropriate committees of Congress
The term appropriate committees of Congress means—
(A)the congressional intelligence committees;
(B)the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate; and
(C)the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
(b)Establishment
There is established within the executive branch an interagency committee to counter active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence.
(c)Membership
(1)In general
(A)Appointment
Each head of an agency or department of the United States Government set out under subparagraph (B) shall appoint one member of the committee established by subsection (b) from among officials of such agency or department who occupy a position that is required to be appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(B)Head of an agency or department
The head of an agency or department of the United States Government set out under this subparagraph are the following:
(i)The Director of National Intelligence.
(ii)The Secretary of State.
(iii)The Secretary of Defense.
(iv)The Secretary of the Treasury.
(v)The Attorney General.
(vi)The Secretary of Energy.
(vii)The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(viii)The head of any other agency or department of the United States Government designated by the President for purposes of this section.
(d)Meetings
The committee shall meet on a regular basis.
(e)Duties
The duties of the committee established by subsection (b) shall be as follows:
(1)To counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence, including by exposing falsehoods, agents of influence, corruption, human rights abuses, terrorism, and assassinations carried out by the security services or political elites of the Russian Federation or their proxies.
(2)Such other duties as the President may designate for purposes of this section.
(f)Staff
The committee established by subsection (b) may employ such staff as the members of such committee consider appropriate.
(g)Budget request
A request for funds required for the functioning of the committee established by subsection (b) may be included in each budget for a fiscal year submitted by the President pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code.
(h)Annual report
(1)Requirement
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, and consistent with the protection of intelligence sources and methods, the committee established by subsection (b) shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report describing steps being taken by the committee to counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence.
(2)Matters included
Each report under paragraph (1) shall include a summary of the following:
(A)Active measures by Russia to exert covert influence during the previous year, including significant incidents and notable trends.
(B)Key initiatives of the committee.
(C)Implementation of the committee’s initiatives by the heads of the agencies and departments of the United States Government specified in subsection (c)(1)(B).
(D)Analysis of the success of such initiatives.
(E)Changes to such initiatives from the previous year.
(3)Separate reporting requirement
The requirement to submit an annual report under paragraph (1) is in addition to any other reporting requirements with respect to Russia.
http://m.imgur.com/83NMq0z?r
Daily dose of fake news
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2016/12/stop_calling_everything_fake_news.html
Wonder who these "highly educated" people voted for...
http://archive.is/xNaqL
Maybe sponsor or enabler is a better description.
It's a shame I share the same first name as Jones.