Fake News

The Lame-Stream Media are the champions of Fake News. The vast majority of our big-city newspapers and TV news programs have been spewing liberal propaganda for decades. In the 1950s and 1960s big cities typically had 2 newspapers, one liberal and one conservative, but media consolidation ended the conservative newspapers.

Media liberal bias also included news blackouts for issues the media didn’t want the public to know. It was clear that the media and the politicians didn’t want to talk about UN Agenda 21 after it was released in 1992. It they had covered it, the scheme would have caused opposition to it. So, they called it a “conspiracy theory”, despite the fact that you could buy a copy of the UN Agenda 21 book direct from the UN. If you got one and read it, you would see a horror show about a one-world government, run by an oligarchy, fronted by the UN bureaucracy, with appointed, unelected governance like the Soviet Union. All of our current and historic nation states would be abolished, the global population goal would be set at 500 million, leaving us to wonder how they would reduce our current 7 trillion population.  The government would own and control everything.  There would be no private property or freedom of speech or movement. Our population would live in government apartments in transit villages. Single family homes and cars would be restricted to “government rulers”. The Wilding Project would give the land back to the wild animals. It’s right out of a science fiction movie and it hides in plain sight. But only a handful of sites have this information.  Then we see new TV shows like “tiny house” and “naked and afraid” that suggest that our economic decline is assured.

We’ve seen articles about “false flags” that question the Sandy Hook school shooting, because there was a news blackout and no funerals. We’ve seen articles about the HAARP weather weapon and the Chemtrails and the low pressure area that sucked Hurricane Sandy into New Jersey, but we also read where the HAARP program was closed and we haven’t seen Chemtrails lately. We have seen articles about news blackouts in Europe where rape by refugee stories were suppressed. There is no end to the reader skepticism aimed at the media.

The Fake News moniker was invented by the “media” to attack conservative news sources.  See below:

Google and Facebook Take Aim at Fake News Sites

By NICK WINGFIELD, MIKE ISAAC and KATIE BENNERNOV. 14, 2016

Over the last week, two of the world’s biggest internet companies have faced mounting criticism over how fake news on their sites may have influenced the presidential election’s outcome.

On Monday, those companies responded by making it clear that they would not tolerate such misinformation by taking pointed aim at fake news sites’ revenue sources. Google kicked off the action on Monday afternoon when the Silicon Valley search giant said it would ban websites that peddle fake news from using its online advertising service. Hours later, Facebook, the social network, updated the language in its Facebook Audience Network policy, which already says it will not display ads in sites that show misleading or illegal content, to include fake news sites.

“We have updated the policy to explicitly clarify that this applies to fake news,” a Facebook spokesman said in a statement. “Our team will continue to closely vet all prospective publishers and monitor existing ones to ensure compliance.”

Taken together, the decisions were a clear signal that the tech behemoths could no longer ignore the growing outcry over their power in distributing information to the American electorate.

Facebook has been at the epicenter of that debate, accused  by some commentators of swinging some voters in favor of President-elect Donald J. Trump through misleading and outright wrong stories that spread quickly via the social network. One such false story claimed that Pope Francis had endorsed Mr. Trump.

Google did not escape the glare, with critics saying the company gave too much prominence to false news stories. On Sunday, the site Mediaite reported that the top result on a Google search for “final election vote count 2016” was a link to a story on a website called 70News that wrongly stated that Mr. Trump, who won the Electoral College, was ahead of his Democratic challenger, Hillary Clinton, in the popular vote.

By Monday evening, the fake story had fallen to No. 2 in a search for those terms. Google says software algorithms that use hundreds of factors determine the ranking of news stories.

“The goal of search is to provide the most relevant and useful results for our users,” Andrea Faville, a Google spokeswoman, said in a statement. “In this case, we clearly didn’t get it right, but we are continually working to improve our algorithms.”

Facebook’s decision to clarify its ad policy language is notable because Mark Zuckerberg, the social network’s chief executive, has repeatedly fobbed off criticism that the company had an effect on how people voted. In a post on his Facebook page over the weekend, he said that 99 percent of what people see on the site is authentic, and only a tiny amount is fake news and hoaxes.

“Over all, this makes it extremely unlikely hoaxes changed the outcome of this election in one direction or the other,” Mr. Zuckerberg wrote.

Yet within Facebook, employees and executives have been increasingly questioning their responsibilities and role in influencing the electorate, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

Facebook’s ad policy update will not stem the flow of fake news stories that spread through the news feeds that people see when they visit the social network.

Facebook has long spoken of how it helped influence and stoke democratic movements in places like the Middle East, and it tells its advertisers that it can help sway its users with ads. Facebook reaches 1.8 billion people around the globe, and the company is one of the largest distributors of news online. A Pew Research Center study said that nearly half of American adults rely on Facebook as a news source.

Google’s decision on Monday relates to the Google AdSense system that independent web publishers use to display advertising on their sites, generating revenue when ads are seen or clicked on. The advertisers pay Google, and Google pays a portion of those proceeds to the publishers. More than two million publishers use Google’s advertising network.

For some time, Google has had policies in place prohibiting misleading advertisements from its system, including promotions for counterfeit goods and weight-loss scams. Google’s new policy, which it said would go into effect “imminently,” will extend its ban on misrepresentative content to the websites its advertisements run on.

“Moving forward, we will restrict ad serving on pages that misrepresent, misstate or conceal information about the publisher, the publisher’s content or the primary purpose of the web property,” Ms. Faville said.

Ms. Faville said that the policy change had been in the works for a while and was not in reaction to the election.

It remains to be seen how effective Google’s new policy on fake news will be in practice. The policy will rely on a combination of automated and human reviews to help determine what is fake. Although satire sites like The Onion are not the target of the policy, it is not clear whether some of them, which often run fake news stories written for humorous effect, will be inadvertently affected by Google’s change.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/technology/google-will-ban-websites-that-host-fake-news-from-using-its-ad-service.html?_r=0

 

Liberals Trying to Label Conservative Media as “Fake News” By Onan Coca 11/18/16 

We’ve been forced to talk about the idea of “fake news” in recent days, due largely to the crush of pressure from the left following Donald Trump’s “surprising” election victory.

Liberals, searching for the nearest scapegoat (that doesn’t have anything to do with them) have latched on to the “right-wing” media as the reason for Hillary Clinton’s spectacular collapse. For them it is more likely that conservative websites publishing “fake news” caused Clinton’s downfall than it is that they made a mistake in letting the DNC select the most corrupt, untrustworthy candidate in recent memory.

They don’t care about the WikiLeaks releases, they don’t care about the undercover video from Project Veritas proving that the Democrat Party was involved in illegal electoral behavior, they don’t care that the DNC rigged the primary for Hillary Clinton, they don’t care that the media was found to be working with the Democrat Party in an effort to win the election.

Nope. They care about conservative websites running content that they disagree with. Which is why they’ve started labeling us all “fake news,” whether or not the moniker is accurate.

For example:

CNN ran this story on Wednesday saying that Trump supporters were considering boycotting Pepsi over comments that the CEO of the company never actually made. If I were a fact-checker I’d rate this story as half-true and the CNN story as “fake.” CNN complained that several sites said that PepsiCo’s CEO Indra Nooyi told Trump supporters to “take their business elsewhere.” (She never said this.) Based on these four words, CNN argued that the entire Nooyi as anti-Trump story was “fake.”

However, any reader of Constitution.com knows that this CNN story is just plain wrong. Sure, the fake quote may have swayed some folks, but there is more to this story and Nooyi’s disdain for Trump and his supporters than CNN (and Brian Stelter) let on. In the interview in question, Nooyi makes clear what she thinks of Mr. Trump and his supporters, and we reported on it at Constitution.

Here’s the money quote from Yahoo! Finance: PepsiCo’s CEO said the election of Donald Trump as president was terrifying her employees.

“I had to answer a lot of questions from my daughters, from our employees. They were all in mourning,” PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi told Andrew Ross Sorkin at The New York Times’ DealBook conference on Thursday. “Our employees were all crying,” she said. “And the question that they’re asking, especially those who are not white, ‘Are we safe?’ Women are asking, ‘Are we safe?’ LGBT people are asking, ‘Are we safe?’ I never thought I would have to answer those questions.”

That quote alone is enough to cause Trump’s supporters to boycott Pepsi. In fact, Yahoo’s title to their story would probably be enough – “PepsiCo CEO: Employees are scared for their safety after Trump’s Election”.

Consider the implications of her comments. Why would PepsiCo’s employees be scared? They can’t be scared that they’ll be deported – they have jobs at PepsiCo, so they must be legal residents or citizens. So what fear does Donald Trump and his supporters instill in them? The reality is that while Nooyi may never have said that she wanted Trump supporters to “take their business elsewhere,” what she did imply with her comments was far worse.

Here’s another example of “Fake News” this time from NBC: Check out this headline: As Trump Leaves Press Behind for Steak Dinner, Incoming Admin Already Showing Lack of Transparency.

Donald Trump took his family out for dinner on Tuesday night after the Secret Service had told the press who were following him that he was in for the night. The decision to go out to dinner prompted NBC to say that Trump was “already showing” that his administration would lack transparency. While the title might be discounted as simply foolish, consider that this is the same media that allowed Hillary Clinton to hide for the better part of two years as she simultaneously campaigned for the presidency. Trump has allowed an unprecedented amount of public access into his life, but the first time he goes to dinner without the press… he’s excoriated for not being “transparent” enough. But don’t worry, NBC doesn’t do “fake news,” only the right wing media does.

Just in case you think these are cherry-picked, here are some more examples of the main stream media posting “fake news” by using clickbait headlines, false headlines, burying the lede, and other “fake news” methods.

·       One of the more famous “fake stories” from the recent presidential campaign argued that Mr. Trump mocking a disabled reporter. Sadly, for the media, it only looked as if Trump was mocking him if you edited the video footage just right.

·       CBS caught editing Bill Clinton’s comments about Hillary Clinton’s health.

·       The New York Times announcing Donald Trump’s election victory used this headline to lead their paper, “Democrats, Students and Foreign Allies Face the Reality of a Trump Presidency.” The headline was so terrible that even the folks at MSNBC were shocked and disgusted.

·       Here’s the AP with a story titled, GOP Lawmaker: FBI gave immunity to top Clinton aide. Sounds innocuous enough… until you dig down to the 22^ndparagraph (out of 25 paragraphs) and learn that President Obama had been emailing Clinton on her private server! Something the President said he had no knowledge about.

·       Many different mainstream news sources have been reporting on the “surge” of hate crimes in 2016. Only problem… no such “surge” has occurred.

·       Here’s one from the Washington Post back in May. They had just conducted a poll showing Donald Trump with a 2-point lead over Hillary Clinton but decided to go with this headline for the piece: Poll: Election 2016 shapes up as a contest of negatives. Weird, right? The big story was that Trump had overtaken Clinton in their poll, but instead WaPo chose to focus on… the negatives.

·       Here’s a story that almost every major media organization ran some version of – Trump tried to get his kids security clearance. The only issue with this story is, that again, almost every major media organization ran with – is that it never actually seems to have happened.

·       Remember when CNN used a misleading headline to tie Donald Trump to shock-jock Howard Stern?

·       ABC basically invents the idea that Newt Gingrich agreed with Mitt Romney about Romneycare.

·       A bunch of main stream media sources published headlines about a Palestinian terrorist attack that forgot to mention the terrorists.

·       Just last year NBC argued that “free” college was “a goal everyone can agree on.”

·       How about the time that the NY Daily News cover compared NRA president Wayne LaPierre with 5 different murdering terrorists?

·       When the main stream media sees ethics problems with conservatives who do business with foreign entities, but never seemed that concerned with Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation’s activities.

·       CNN runs a story about a professor predicting Donald Trump’s impeachmentjust days after Mr. Trump wins the White House. This is the definition of “fake news,” isn’t it?

These are just a few, and probably not even the best examples. The point is that when it comes to calling out “fake news” websites, the mainstream media is the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.

http://constitution.com/liberals-trying-label-conservative-media-fake-news/

Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader