• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Website Labeled ‘Fake News’ Threatens To Sue WaPo For Defamation

TheDemSocialist said:
Could be. Or it could be lipstick, a cellphone, car keys, a mic pack, a crack pipe, a thumb drive (holding either deleted Benghazi e-mails or Donald Trump's tax returns), a mind control device, colostomy bag clip. All which have been peddled..

But can we get back on subject?
Click to expand...

Sure....I think that most people reading headlines like what you put up there would come to the same conclusion that you and I can admit, and that is that those were not "hard news"..... The problem is that the people feel as though they are not getting hard news from what should be "trusted" to give us the truth without opinion, unless it is clear that opinion is what they are giving in an op ed section....We don't get that today, so ironically, it is the very papers like NYTimes, and WaPo that in a way gave rise to these other sites.
 
j-mac said:
Sure....I think that most people reading headlines like what you put up there would come to the same conclusion that you and I can admit, and that is that those were not "hard news"..... The problem is that the people feel as though they are not getting hard news from what should be "trusted" to give us the truth without opinion, unless it is clear that opinion is what they are giving in an op ed section....We don't get that today, so ironically, it is the very papers like NYTimes, and WaPo that in a way gave rise to these other sites.
Click to expand...

So your point being is this. People go to fake news conspiracy website like InfoWars and other places that peddle the story of Pizzagate because they are not getting what they want to hear. I guess your kinda proving my point. That fake news does exist.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So your point being is this. People go to fake news conspiracy website like InfoWars and other places that peddle the story of Pizzagate because they are not getting what they want to hear. I guess your kinda proving my point. That fake news does exist.
Click to expand...

Maybe, kind of....And yes "Fake news" does exist, but not in just internet sites with dumb titles or known conspiracy theorists, but in the pages of NYTimes, and WaPo as well....It's called bias. Now, in other discussions on bias we are always told that yes bias exists, but that rational people can discern fact from editorial content and make the decision for themselves. Why not here? No, to argue that some sort of government entity needs to make that call for us, is to advocate censorship.
 
j-mac said:
Maybe, kind of....And yes "Fake news" does exist, but not in just internet sites with dumb titles or known conspiracy theorists, but in the pages of NYTimes, and WaPo as well....It's called bias. Now, in other discussions on bias we are always told that yes bias exists, but that rational people can discern fact from editorial content and make the decision for themselves. Why not here?
Click to expand...
Fake news is generally used to confirm ones bias via deception and/or to create irrational outrage.

No, to argue that some sort of government entity needs to make that call for us, is to advocate censorship.
Click to expand...
Are you stating that I think the government should "make the calls" on what "news" should be published? Because I have stated twice I do not advocate that....
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Fake news is generally used to confirm ones bias via deception and/or to create irrational outrage.
Click to expand...


You don't think that supposed "accepted" news sites do this as well?

Are you stating that I think the government should "make the calls" on what "news" should be published? Because I have stated twice I do not advocate that....
Click to expand...

So then, what is your proposal for dealing with them?
 
j-mac said:
You don't think that supposed "accepted" news sites do this as well?
Click to expand...
For the most part no. Maybe in an op-ed section, but those are ran as opinion pieces and not "news". But for the most part they dont publish stories that Hillary Clinton is involved in a child sex ring at a pizza joint. Or they dont publish stories that Barack Obama is involved in a satanic ritual. Or that chemtrails exist to control our brains. Or Bush did 9/11. Or Hillary Clinton has a secret "seizure doctor" who is on the ready to stab her with some pen. Or that their are Muslim prayer rugs all over the border. Or that Barack Obama told undocumented immigrants to go vote.

So then, what is your proposal for dealing with them?
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier. There is not "solution" which involves the government. The only thing that can be relied upon is people's own objectiveness, researches, "fact checkers", just a tiny bit of research, etc.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
For the most part no. Maybe in an op-ed section, but those are ran as opinion pieces and not "news". But for the most part they dont publish stories that Hillary Clinton is involved in a child sex ring at a pizza joint. Or they dont publish stories that Barack Obama is involved in a satanic ritual. Or that chemtrails exist to control our brains. Or Bush did 9/11. Or Hillary Clinton has a secret "seizure doctor" who is on the ready to stab her with some pen. Or that their are Muslim prayer rugs all over the border. Or that Barack Obama told undocumented immigrants to go vote.
Click to expand...

For the most part? Really?

Like I said earlier. There is not "solution" which involves the government. The only thing that can be relied upon is people's own objectiveness, researches, "fact checkers", just a tiny bit of research, etc.
Click to expand...

So then have a little faith in people then would ya? Good grief, it sure wasn't conservatives that started bitching about supposed "fake news".....
 
j-mac said:
Ok, noted, but this up and coming attack of internet sites that are competing with established news outlets like NYTimes, and WaPo, threatening their readership in the wake of recent uncovered, unabashed bias during the election and in fact up to the present, I think is an attempt by a gasping, failing structure that can no longer compete with the likes of internet journalism, social media, and citizen watchdogs that expose their agenda's....
Click to expand...

Or these sites that you are complaining about actually has the journalistic integrity to call out these perpetrators and peddlers of fake news. If one was to do a cross reference check of the stories posted on Nakedcapitalism vs Washington Post, which one do you truly think will be the most objective there? Further I have yet to see much in the way of this so-called fake news that the Washington Post is supposedly peddling. Care to point it out to me?
 
j-mac said:
For the most part? Really?
Click to expand...
Yes


So then have a little faith in people then would ya? Good grief, it sure wasn't conservatives that started bitching about supposed "fake news".....
Click to expand...
You're the one bitching about the study and article on the study about fake news :lamo
Im simply saying it exists and then you get all your panties in a bunch
 
ModerateGOP said:
Uh this news site in the article is no better than my blog the difference is I try to remain objective...
Click to expand...
Now you're melding fakery and self-deception.
Both are difficult to prove.
 
bubbabgone said:
Now you're melding fakery and self-deception.
Both are difficult to prove.
Click to expand...

I think when you name your site Nakedcapitalism, the agenda there is all too clear, don't you? The bias is in the title.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Yes



You're the one bitching about the study and article on the study about fake news :lamo
Im simply saying it exists and then you get all your panties in a bunch
Click to expand...

Sure it exists.
And using accusations of fakery can be used to discredit actual events.
 
ModerateGOP said:
They even have an agenda: chronicles the large scale, concerted campaign to reduce the bargaining power and pay of ordinary workers relative to investors and elite technocrats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_Capitalism
Click to expand...

"The site has had over 60 million visitors since 2007, and was cited as among CNBC’s 2012 top 25 "Best Alternative Financial Blogs", calling Smith "a harsh critic of Wall Street who believes that fraud was at the center of the financial crisis."[2]

Hmmmm....Seems your so called main stream truth tellers liked them a whole lot, until they didn't eh?
 
j-mac said:
"The site has had over 60 million visitors since 2007, and was cited as among CNBC’s 2012 top 25 "Best Alternative Financial Blogs", calling Smith "a harsh critic of Wall Street who believes that fraud was at the center of the financial crisis."[2]

Hmmmm....Seems your so called main stream truth tellers liked them a whole lot, until they didn't eh?
Click to expand...

Are you telling me that CNBC and Wash Post have different opinions??? Wow.
 
j-mac said:
So, here's the question....What constitutes a "fake" news site? Is it just because a heavy hitter like the NYTimes, or WaPo says so? We are all about to find out.....What say you?
Click to expand...

If a random sampling of their stuff is researched and turns out to be fake, then they qualify. It's time for the "entertainment only" label.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Are you telling me that CNBC and Wash Post have different opinions??? Wow.
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that all this "fake news" crap is about MSM losing their hold on readership/viewership and they are scared to death since this last election showed them to be the lying hacks they are.
 
jet57 said:
If a random sampling of their stuff is researched and turns out to be fake, then they qualify. It's time for the "entertainment only" label.
Click to expand...

You need a label to tell what is BS and what isn't? Really?
 
j-mac said:
You need a label to tell what is BS and what isn't? Really?
Click to expand...

Well people obviously NEED a label or fake news wouldn't be a problem now would it.
 
jet57 said:
Well people obviously NEED a label or fake news wouldn't be a problem now would it.
Click to expand...


It's not a problem....You mean you can't tell the difference between say PrisonPlanet, and NYTimes?
 
j-mac said:
No, I am saying that all this "fake news" crap is about MSM losing their hold on readership/viewership and they are scared to death since this last election showed them to be the lying hacks they are.
Click to expand...

You still haven't shown this to be true.
 
j-mac said:
I don't have to show anything to hold an opinion....This is my opinion....You don't like it? so what?
Click to expand...

You are acting like it is a fact and are telling me like I should know it. You couldn't have formed this opinion on your own, I was just trying to see where you got it from, if you don't want to share that, then there is no point in discussing this any further.
 
ModerateGOP said:
You are acting like it is a fact and are telling me like I should know it. You couldn't have formed this opinion on your own, I was just trying to see where you got it from, if you don't want to share that, then there is no point in discussing this any further.
Click to expand...

I couldn't have formed this opinion on my own? why not? I assure you as a 54 year old man that has seen quite a bit in my life, I can form my own opinions.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom