AVENUE VIET Forum Index AVENUE VIET
An Online Community
 
AlbumAlbum   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of the webmasters, administrators and moderators of this forum. Refer to the complete disclaimer.
FAKE NEWS - Beware!
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AVENUE VIET Forum Index » Politix
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vu



Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 2355
Location: L.A., California

PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:28 am    Post subject: FAKE NEWS - Beware! Reply with quote

It seems to me that UnMask in particular should be made aware of this. super grin

The plague of fake news is getting worse -- here's how to protect yourself

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/30/media/facebook-fake-news-plague/index.html

It's time for a new rule on the web: Double, no, triple check before you
share. Especially if it seems too good to be true.

Why? Look no further than Donald Trump's Twitter account. Trump claimed
Sunday morning that "Twitter, Google and Facebook are burying the FBI
criminal investigation of Clinton."

Not only was there no proof of this, but it was pretty easy to disprove.
The FBI email inquiry was at the top of Google News; FBI director James
Comey's name was at the top of Facebook's "trending" box; and Twitter's
"moments" section had a prominent story about the controversy.

Nevertheless, Trump's wrong-headed "burying" claim was his most popular
tweet of the day. About 25,000 accounts retweeted it and almost 50,000
"liked" it, helping the falsehood spread far and wide.

The rise of social media has had many upsides, but one downside has been
the spread of misinformation. Fake news has become a plague on the Web,
especially on social networks like Facebook. As I said on Sunday's
"Reliable Sources" on CNN, unreliable sources about this election have
become too numerous to count.

So that's why I recommended a "triple check before you share" rule.
New web sites designed to trick and mislead people seem to pop up every
single day. For their creators, the incentives are clear: more social
shares mean more page views mean more ad dollars.

But the B.S. stories hurt the people who read and share them over and over
again. Many of these fakes reinforce the views of conservative or liberal
voters and insulate them from the truth. The stories prey on people who
want to believe the worst about the opposition.

A recent BuzzFeed study of "hyperpartisan Facebook pages" found that these
pages "are consistently feeding their millions of followers false or
misleading information."

The less truthful the content, the more frequently it was shared -- which
does not bode well for the nation's news literacy during a long, bitter
election season.

"Right-wing pages were more prone to sharing false or misleading
information than left-wing pages," the BuzzFeed reporting team said.
On a few occasions, made-up or highly misleading stories have even snuck
into Facebook's "trending" box -- a problem that the company says it is
trying to address.

In a few cases, Trump aides and family members have themselves been duped
by fake news stories, including a hoax version of ABC News with a story
headlined "Donald Trump Protester Speaks Out: 'I Was Paid $3,500 To
Protest Trump's Rally.'"

A close look at the web site reveals that it is not, in fact, the actual
ABC News. But the site tricked Trump's son Eric Trump in early October.
"Finally, the truth comes out," he tweeted, promoting a link to the bogus
story.

As soon as I spoke about this on television on Sunday, CNN detractors
filled my inbox with messages saying that CNN is the ultimate example of
"fake news."

But that's a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue. Whatever faults CNN
has, news organizations small and large try very hard to report the truth.

Fake news sites and Facebook feeds, on the other hand, traffic in
misinformation. My sense is that there are three buckets of these sites:
#1, Hoax sites with totally made-up news headlines that try to trick you;
#2, Hyperpartisan sites that aren't lying, per se, but are misleading,
because they only share good news about your political party and bad news
about the other party;
#3, "Hybrids" that purposely mix a little bit of fact and then a lot of
fiction.

These sites aren't going away, so it's up to Internet users to spot fake
news and avoid spreading it.

Fact-checking sites like Snopes can help -- they are devoted to ferreting
out hoaxes and tricks.

The Sunlight Foundation's Alex Howard tweeted these tips:
Search the source link on Twitter
Google it
Check Snopes
Consider record of source

Josh Stearns, a longtime media activist who now works at Democracy Fund,
said newsrooms also have a role to play.
"Fact checking has taken center stage in this election, but newsrooms need
to go beyond fact checking politicians statements and help debunk viral
misinformation too," he told me. "At a time when trust in media is at an
all time low, journalists should call out these fake news stories and help
citizens tell fact from fiction."

Trump's false claim about Google, Facebook and Twitter "burying" bad news
about Clinton criticized what he called the "very dishonest media."
Ironically, he was using Twitter to blast Twitter.

Trump may have gotten the idea from an inaccurate Zero Hedge blog post
alleging a "social media blackout." The blog post contained false
information.

I asked the Trump campaign to provide a source for the wild claim, but no
one has responded.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
vu



Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 2355
Location: L.A., California

PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:41 am    Post subject: Blurring the lines on TV News Reply with quote

Editorial: Using political flacks as news analysts erodes faith in journalism

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-trump-clinton-cnn-fox-20161101-story.html

Los Angeles Times
Blurring the lines on TV News
Editorial
By The Times Editorial Board
Nov 2, 2016

Donna Brazile has been a powerful force in Democratic politics for years.
She worked on the presidential campaigns of Jesse Jackson, Walter Mondale
and Richard Gephardt, and she ran Al Gore’s 2000 campaign. She’s a
partisan, a strategist, an operative — a political hack to some, a party
loyalist to others. What she’s notis an independent, dispassionate
analyst of the news.

She’s been playing one on TV, however — as a talking head for CNN. She
was omnipresent in the early campaign coverage (before taking a leave),
where she was routinely identified merely as a “CNN commentator.”
Then, this week, the network severed ties with her after learning from
hacked emails posted on WikiLeaks that she had surreptitiously fed debate
questions to the Clinton campaign during the Democratic primaries. On
Tuesday, CNN chief Jeff Zucker called Brazile’s actions “unethical”
and “disgusting.”

But really, what did he expect? Isn’t it obvious that if you employ
“commentators” who are already committed partisans on one side or the
other, they’re going to be hard-pressed to live up to the traditional
ethical standards of even-handed journalism? Paying political operatives
to act as journalists inevitably creates dual loyalties and encourages
situations like this one.

Brazile unquestionably behaved in a duplicitous manner, and CNN was right
to be upset. But the bigger problem, arguably, is that she and a raft of
other political operatives from both major parties had contracts with CNN
in the first place. These are examples of the cozy relationship between
the network and the people it covers (the same can be said for Fox and its
stable of political insiders) that undercut journalistic credibility, and
make it difficult for the public to find trustworthy analysis on the
talking-head cable TV shows.

Instead of offering insight, they often engage in outrageously illogical
contortions to buff up whichever candidate they support, or try to dent
whomever they oppose.

And why wouldn’t they? Who would expect Mary Matalin, say, to
acknowledge the flaws of a Republican candidate? Why would Paul Begala say
anything to undermine his friends in the Democratic party?

A recent low point: Trump surrogate Jeffrey Lord’s bizarre assertion on
CNNduring the primaries that the 19th century Ku Klux Klan was “a
liberal leftist terrorist organization” and formed “the military arm,
the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party,” which (and this part is
true) supported slavery in the lead up to the Civil War. Other partisans
similarly defy credulity, particularly former Donald Trump campaign
manager Corey Lewandowski, who collected severance checks and advised the
Trump campaign, with whom he had signed nondisclosure and
non-disparagement agreements, while under contract with CNN.

The persistent presence of these spin doctors on news programs not only
confuses voters, it can compromise journalistic efforts to bring clarity
to what the candidates are saying and doing. Given Trump’s inability to
tell the truth or stick to a lie, it doesn’t help when his surrogates,
appearing as paid commentators, take to the air to persuade voters that
their candidate didn’t just say what everyone clearly heard him say.

The cable news networks are entitled to hire whomever they want, of
course. But they might want to do some soul-searching after election day
about the nature of political analysis and the benefit of keeping some
distance between the news and the political campaigns they are putatively
covering.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
UnMask



Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 1477
Location: USA East Coast

PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:32 am    Post subject: fake email? Reply with quote

This was on Wikileaks this AM... Here's a copy of the text that says she didn't turn over all the emails in the 55,000.....
--------
Definitely

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 4, 2015, at 8:01 PM, Margolis, Jim <Jim.Margolis@gmmb.com> wrote:
>
> Yes.
> If there is a release of the 55K, are there others that are not being
> released?

>
> On 3/4/15, 7:25 PM, "Jennifer Palmier I" <jennifer.m.palmieri@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Team - wanted to let you know that Cheryl is working with State to get
>> agreement on release of the 55k pages of emails she have to State. The
>> hope would be that we are able to say tonight to the press that we are
>> working with State to get emails released soon. Not sure where those
>> discussions will land, but hope is either State agrees to release on
>> timely basis or we pledge to release them ourselves in ten days/week.
>> Assume you all would agree this is right move?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>
-------
I stayed up all night typing up this fake! Smile

You can find it too on Wikileaks.... go to Podesta, search: emails memo from Beneson on March 3, 2015
_________________
Proud Republican Elephant Flying on Magic Carpet
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
inkling7
Admin Pro Tem


Joined: 01 Jun 2008
Posts: 6458
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 10:50 am    Post subject: Early dementia or Trump village idiot? Reply with quote

Unmask I think I can safely say you are now either suffering from and early form of dementia or are officially one of Trumps village idiots.... You have now confirmed the fact that a lot of us have realised that often good-looking men have no brains and rely on vanity or that their brains really are located below the usual place brains are located..... Not funny but a worrying fact that a few males I know have now validated by reading your posts....
_________________
The Grumpiest Old Woman on Ave Viet.....
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Wildflower



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 6737
Location: Shuttling between France and the US

PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 2:22 pm    Post subject: Re: fake email? Reply with quote

UnMask wrote:
This was on Wikileaks this AM... Here's a copy of the text that says she didn't turn over all the emails in the 55,000.....
-------
I stayed up all night typing up this fake! Smile

You can find it too on Wikileaks.... go to Podesta, search: emails memo from Beneson on March 3, 2015

Waste of time and sleep, UnMask dear.

First, I thought we'd determined that Wikileaks was anything but reliable. I am not going to waste my time "checking" anything on that site. You yourself say they hate Clinton. So they'll do, say or write anything to try to sink her.

Second, having been yourself the victim of an email hack, you should be the first to know how easy hackers can fake emails.

Third, I fail to see the relevance of that email you spent all night retyping.

I'm seriously begin to think Inkling has a point about your brain. Or maybe the lack of sleep affected you? Poor dear. hug
_________________
My Most Prestigious Award wink
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
Kerowyn
Herald


Joined: 04 Sep 2011
Posts: 1838
Location: Queendom of Valdemar

PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 4:17 pm    Post subject: Brain location Reply with quote

inkling7 wrote:
... often good-looking men have no brains and rely on vanity or that their brains really are located below the usual place brains are located....

Well, Inkling, while I do agree with you about the Trump village idiot part, I beg to differ about UnMask's brain location if you're implying it is where you once said it was. Whatever causes him to be a perfect dummy in this whole deal, I don't think he's really lusting after Trump's body.
_________________
Valdemar's Warrior Women
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Xuân Phong



Joined: 05 Mar 2005
Posts: 921
Location: All over the place

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 1:54 am    Post subject: Talk about fake news! Reply with quote

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/11/04/alert-hillary-clinton-is-stealing-the-election-in-ohio/

Alert: Hillary Clinton Is Stealing the Election in Ohio*

*Hacking voting machines isn’t necessarily what you should be worried about. It’s fake headlines like this one that could upend Election Day.
_________________
vroom
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
inkling7
Admin Pro Tem


Joined: 01 Jun 2008
Posts: 6458
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 3:24 am    Post subject: Impaired judgment, not lust Reply with quote

Ah Kerowyn the post wasn't implying that Unmask was lusting after Trump's body or anyone's else's but that they let their vanity impede their judgement... Or that they are just show ponies...LOL
_________________
The Grumpiest Old Woman on Ave Viet.....
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Kerowyn
Herald


Joined: 04 Sep 2011
Posts: 1838
Location: Queendom of Valdemar

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 3:35 am    Post subject: Re: Impaired judgment, not lust Reply with quote

inkling7 wrote:
Ah Kerowyn the post wasn't implying that Unmask was lusting after Trump's body or anyone's else's but that they let their vanity impede their judgement... Or that they are just show ponies...LOL

Well, you did write "that their brains really are located below the usual place brains are located...." which would imply that, like Trump's or Weiner's, his brain resides somewhere below his belt. wink
_________________
Valdemar's Warrior Women
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
inkling7
Admin Pro Tem


Joined: 01 Jun 2008
Posts: 6458
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 6:36 am    Post subject: Maybe... Reply with quote

Maybe they think the song is about them and they lust after themselves.. Sorry Carole King...LOL super grin
_________________
The Grumpiest Old Woman on Ave Viet.....
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AVENUE VIET Forum Index » Politix All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group