Facebook Bans Fake News Sites From Using Its Advertising Network

Armenius said:
Media Matters for America is the media policing arm of the Democratic party. It's ironic you try to prove Breitbart's "fakeness" with a list of sources from a propaganda organization.
Click to expand...
No truly neutral or close to neutral news organization would do this work because they would be labelled and attacked as partisan. If you dispute any of their assertions or interpretations in the link let's hear it.
 
thejokker said:
Tell the truth: you were stunned and blind-sided by last Tuesday's results. "Your" source of information failed you.
Click to expand...
Which is part of the problem these days, is that its so easy to insulate yourself by only exposing yourself to social media circles and "news" outlets that reaffirm your predisposed beliefs.

There are a lot of people that genuinely were led to believe that Trump and his supporters are "literally Hitler" and don't even understand what it might mean to half the country when they say they want to "Make America Great Again", in that echo-chamber.

All they heard from their friends was that Brexit was IMPOSSIBLE ("WRONG" - Trump) and Donald Trump is a joke candidate that isn't really running ("WRONG" - Trump), yet alone could win the nomination over a household name from a dynasty like Bush, yet ALONE defeat another dynasty in the form of a Clinton, and the news outlets likewise kept telling them that there was ZERO chance and mocked everyone that argued otherwise, because their goal with nonsensical polls showing Trump with just a 1.6% chance of winning was not to accurately gauge the mood of the country but to influence the election through herd-mentality (and it failed, miserably).

 
Don't mind me.... just dropping some truth bombs. I'm sure some older people remember when when another group banned 'fake' information

images.duckduckgo.com.2.jpg

images.duckduckgo.com.jpg
 
dr.stevil said:
Don't mind me.... just dropping some truth bombs. I'm sure some older people remember when when another group banned 'fake' information

View attachment 10695
View attachment 10697
Click to expand...

HOW DARE YOU point out the hypocrisy of the misinformed and labelers of all things and peoples one disagrees with as ...ists and exhibiting ...isms....I need to grab my coloring book...
 
fadedlogic said:
HOW DARE YOU point out the hypocrisy of the misinformed and labelers of all things and peoples one disagrees with as ...ists and exhibiting ...isms....I need to grab my coloring book...
Click to expand...

Did you get your service puppy and hot cocoa?! don't forget those!
 
A lot of people here seem to be confusing the disparity between news they disagree with and news that is outright fabricated with no real sources other than the author's imagination and desire for income.
 
DedEmbryonicCe11 said:
A lot of people here seem to be confusing the disparity between news they disagree with and news that is outright fabricated with no real sources other than the author's imagination and desire for income.
Click to expand...
Well, the big problem is who gets to decide what is and isn't fake news, as Breibart is listed as a fake news site, when its clearly just a conservative one, and meanwhile we have mainstream media spreading fake news all over the place designed to either intentionally mislead or incite panic for extra revenue (scaring or pissing off people gets more views) or a political agenda.

The fact is, mainstream media doesn't do real investigative reporting anymore, and works with the political establishment for mutual self-interest, as seen in the fiasco where they even gave one of the candidates the debate questions in advance and in another was coaching her during the debate. CNN for example would never go out on a limb and devote resources to investigating Pizzagate or the more recent Twittergate. They love to dismiss it all as "conspiracy theories" but the fact is that journalists aren't doing this type of investigative journalism anymore, leaving it up to the internet and wikileaks, and far too often the conspiracies are proving true (just like the Westminster paedophile dossier).
 
Ducman69 said:
Well, the big problem is who gets to decide what is and isn't fake news, as Breibart is listed as a fake news site, when its clearly just a conservative one, and meanwhile we have mainstream media spreading fake news all over the place designed to either intentionally mislead or incite panic for extra revenue (scaring or pissing off people gets more views) or a political agenda.

The fact is, mainstream media doesn't do real investigative reporting anymore, and works with the political establishment for mutual self-interest, as seen in the fiasco where they even gave one of the candidates the debate questions in advance and in another was coaching her during the debate. CNN for example would never go out on a limb and devote resources to investigating Pizzagate or the more recent Twittergate. They love to dismiss it all as "conspiracy theories" but the fact is that journalists aren't doing this type of investigative journalism anymore, leaving it up to the internet and wikileaks, and far too often the conspiracies are proving true (just like the Westminster paedophile dossier).
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Thank GOD that we have the internet and people like Assange. The citizens have become muckrakers doing real investigative journalism. With all of the insane shit going on across the world, I can't bare to listen to another 'reporter' dissect an out of context Trump tweet or tell me how racist and deplorable America is. It's sensationalist garbage.
 
DedEmbryonicCe11 said:
A lot of people here seem to be confusing the disparity between news they disagree with and news that is outright fabricated with no real sources other than the author's imagination and desire for income.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is confusing that. Twisting facts and outright fabrication deserve the same scrutiny, regardless if the motivation is political or monetary. I don't care if it's CNN, Fox or www.realgetyournewsherefirst.com

We caught the MSM red handed countless times lately completely manufacturing stories, framing a narative and conspiring with a political party.

It's not 'news' anymore... it's propaganda.

edit: I would implore everyone to start comparing international news to what we're seeing in the states. We're being lied to
 
Last edited:
Armenius said:
Media Matters for America is the media policing arm of the Democratic party. It's ironic you try to prove Breitbart's "fakeness" with a list of sources from a propaganda organization.
Click to expand...
Wake up sheeple don't be tricked by our reptilian overlords?
dr.stevil said:
Don't mind me.... just dropping some truth bombs. I'm sure some older people remember when when another group banned 'fake' information
Click to expand...
I don't know why you link to nazi's book burning was quite popular in America without nazis.

I do find it hilarious that people think that being a shitty reporter and a shitty news site, being bad at you job is called "fake news". It's not fake news, fake news is satire. it's not even news it's just doing a shit job. Saying that you're allowed political leaning in reporting is blatantly against actual ethical reporting.

Do your goddamn job and try to get the truth across fucking 4th estate. Instead of trying to be popular by fitting in, this isn't high school it's journalism.

Also can we stop saying "mainstream media" wtf is that? Are you a bunch of hipsters now? You only obtain your information from obscure mediums? It's reporting that you should care about. If you can't tell the difference between information meant to be informative and information meant to be manipulative you should probably go back to school and polish up on english. Yet, perhaps it would all be better served in the form of native advertisements, may yet wake up sheeple, lost its irony.
 
So the question is, how do you do this without censorship? Is an organization going to be developed that dictates what is news and what isnt? Is that organization going to be regulated by the state?

or is this undertaking being done solely by Facebook, and completely up to their discretion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top