Hard News: The fake news problem
440 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 18 Newer→ Last
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
the futility of war.
It has been tempting to think that most of Europe had learned similarly. But there seem to be fractious elements there also. And secession in the area is already evident. Some might say annexation.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
any number of us completely lose the plot
-
Neil,
It's not just the obviously fake news which is an issue.
The Podesta emails weren't exactly fake but the way they were presented was dishonest.
They were released to undermine Clinton and sow animosity amongst Sanders supporters. But because they weren't fake that allowed Wikileaks and their apologists like Greenwald to disingenuously claim this was journalism.
This hacking business isn't really leading to greater transparency, it's lead to Trunp.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
a bridge.
I'm wondering whether I was positing the existence of alternative placements of the abutments.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
greater transparency,
I heard that we had reached peak transparency. Was that fake news?
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
zero.
O'K I'll confess to not reading at Veterans Today very often.
-
Neil,
I wonder about the psychology of the need to dress up attacks on Clinton and other Dems as some sort of heroic journalistic balance.
The ploy is to present selective, out of context information then claim it proves Clinton is a lying, warmongering, Bernie hating neoliberal. Then turn around and claim not to be campaigning against her but oh by the way she's very unpopular don't you know.
It's an interesting charade.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
dress up attacks
Uniforms are popular with partisans. It is good to appear dashing.
-
I spent a while last night reading Russell's report on fake news & the commentaries and I endorse his analysis & share his concern. I made news & current affairs stories in the TVNZ newsroom for a decade. Working with journalists & reporters does inform one of the prevalent syndromes governing msm interpretation of political events: the primary bias requires them to toe the establishment line. Some hew to the left side of that line, some to the right.
As an anti-establishment '60s rebel I learnt to be diplomatic in alerting them to significant subtle dimensions of situations (with eventual gratifying results). Banality & vapidity are no longer the norm they were up until the late '80s. TVNZ political reoortage errs obviously nowadays mostly in uncritical acceptance and recycling of biased stories from overseas - such as that designed to help the Democrat candidate.
The solution to the fake news problem would, in principle, require a suitable clause in a media charter. I believe the media convention that requires balanced reporting is enforced by management of large media orgs to the extent that public perception of fairness is maintained - by and large. Fake news therefore proliferates at the margins, where a free market fosters enterprising media in search of a resonating audience. The danger is sociopathy generated by a shared perception that snowballs so well that it simulates reality for a politically decisive sector of the electorate. That's how Hitler became a dictator.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
I think he is boasting. Fake news rules!
-
Dear Russell, sorry to hear that you missed my “memo” ; late October I think it was.
The actual circumstances remain tolerably “unclear”. Nobody seems to know what happened in the end . But it does seem that Hilary may have been running to catch a bus.
Still, as the saying goes – “it’s an ill wind . . . ” (wink, wink).
The odds offered by Jetbet on a Trump win certainly were stupendous just prior to my “memo” ; trust you got your share.
Best
Rupert -
mpledger, in reply to
Fake news and trolls spouting incoherent nonsense. We once hoped for better things from the internet.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
That was a very pointed response to Greer via Tom Rich, I think comments are still open on Greer’s piece, you might like to challenge him directly on his reasons for voting as he did, all things considered it was Greer’s opinion that Tom was commenting on. As with Obamacare in that piece I linked to:
"Relatively few people will feel the premium increases, but everyone will hear about them,” said Dan Mendelson, president of Avalere Health, a consulting firm. “That will have an effect on the perception of the program."
The fake news problem is one thing, fake news in an election is another thing entirely, just ask that “conspiracy theorist” Nicky Hager. Perception trumps fact in an election. ruinous defamatory pamphlets and flyers have graduated to the net.
One thing a Trump supporter said to me was that she felt that these alarming snippets quoted by a pliant media were in contrast to the general tone of what Trump said at his rallies. I’m not going to wade through any recordings to challenge that, perception being what it is inside and outside a bubble.
Having said that I am intrigued and do desire to get a better understanding as to why individuals voted the way they did, I see little value – when presented with testimony of someone’s reasons for casting their vote – in disregarding that testimony because it doesn’t account for facts or it’s something I can’t wrap my head around yet.
The thing that surprised me most about Trump's campaign was the extent to which he appeared to be adlibbing in this age where everything is recorded.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
Sorry. It’s a meme that is abroad in regard to the role of media in influencing elections. Apologies if it was out of place here.
It was just my interpretation of media commentary in the last few weeks of the campaign. It was my perception that Hilary had been thrown under the bus, and it was a Murdoch publication which appeared to have changed horses . We discussed it at home at the time , and having looked up the odds, were enthusiastic about the potential.
There was no intention to offend. -
Farmer Green, in reply to
he appeared to be adlibbing
I only know Trump from Doonesbury cartoons of a decade or so ago, but I gather that he sells himself well. It's not easy for an insincere person to ad lib because he has to think what to say ; it's easier to ad lib when you're speaking from the heart.
He wouldn't be a bad salesman. -
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Fake news and trolls spouting incoherent nonsense. We once hoped for better things from the internet.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
It’s not easy for an insincere person to ad lib because he has to think what to say ; it’s easier to ad lib when you’re speaking from the heart.
That sounds uncharacteristically emotive, I think it’s just a skill people have and can develop: Trump ran as a glorified shock jock.
-
Dennis Frank, in reply to
Mark, I agree that his propensity to shock came across as the style you mention, and you could even liken his speeches to the anti-establishment voters as tossing bits of red meat to a pack of hyenas - but the farmer is right also.
Speaking from the heart is a sign of authenticity - a quality that often proves essential to the success of political contenders. [I wish the Greens would learn this and reconnect to their traditional voter base accordingly.] I think the stylist is just the front the guy feels he must use to play the democracy game well, and the real Trump shows in his words.
Joe Bennett, on the RNZ panel today, commented that his self-contradictions prove that he has no beliiefs. A very good point. Yet human nature is often like that and politicians being all things to alll people has long been known to be typical and is often seen as the key to political success. I get the impression Trump just blurts out what seems the best thing to say at the time. It worked a treat, so we could draw an obvious conclusion. Tactical genius. I'd rather wait & see if he replicates it on the global stage - when in office.
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
That was a very pointed response to Greer via Tom Rich, I think comments are still open on Greer’s piece, you might like to challenge him directly on his reasons for voting as he did, all things considered it was Greer’s opinion that Tom was commenting on.
More blunt than pointed, but yeah.
The thing is this, though: I've already spent more time than I should researching and commenting on this type of stuff, and it's beginning to draw time away from various other aspects of my life. Which is a micro-example of the macro problem.
To paraphrase a quote generally attributed to Winston Churchill, "a lie gets liked and shared half a million times before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
Farting out a good made-up story that's based on a half-truth or misinterpretation, that 'feels' right, takes very little time, and spreads like a virus. A decent rebuttal, which involves carefully unpicking the strands of it - doing the research, finding the original sources, deconstructing the argument - takes ten times as long, and reaches 1/10th of the audience. There's a lot of time and effort involved, speaking from personal experience.
There are swarms of people literally paid to make up shit - kids in Macedonia, the 'fancy bear' organisation in Russia, Fox News, Breitbart, Alex Jones, The Daily Mail.
How does one go about countering that?
-
mark taslov, in reply to
Extremely well put Dennis, I likewise found myself nodding in agreement with your post on the other thread earlier today. Valuable contributions, very measured.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
How does one go about countering that?
Better educate people. As Bart was saying the other day.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
It wasn't quite so obvious back when the big three were the NZ Listener under Holcroft ; NZ Truth ; and the Auckland Weekly; when every small town , local village even, had a local rag which was the most boring of the available newspapers.
But now the Listener is the dietary advice /agony aunt. So now it is nearly all just circus and entertainment at one level , and propaganda at another level.
Your observation is "right on the money". -
Farmer Green, in reply to
uncharacteristically emotive,
I’ll take that on board.
My experience as a performer has been that when the audience and those on stage “lock on” at a purely emotional level, then the outcome is what is referred to as “a good gig ” or other similar expressions.
It was wrong of me to be thinking that politics is just theatre ; there are serious consequences. I fell into a trap there, extrapolating from a false premise that all media publications are bollocks.
The exhilaration of being freed from loading and feeding out two big wagons of silage EVERY day (amongst all the other chores) for the last ten months must have got to me. :-)
Sober reflection is called for. -
Joe Wylie, in reply to
feeding out
Reminded me of these "chalky snacks":
"The last time I came across these milk biscuits was at primary school in the late 60s.I vaguely remember they were being sent to starving children in India and we were either eating them to see what it was like to be starving or as an incentive to raise money. I'm not sure which."
What triggered the memory was someone's suggestion back then that we'd diminish our dairy stockpile AND solve world hunger by "feeding out" milk biscuits to the 3rd world starving, who'd trail after the tractor saying "Thank you white man."
-
Neil,
Greenwald has gone all anti-anti-fake news.
There's this really weird phenomenon of people denying at great cost to their integrity that there were any factors that decreased the chances of. a Dem victory (other than of course Clinton and the Elites being corrupt liars etc etc,).
And with such vehemence and dishonesty.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.