7

13 comments

[–] KFCNyanCat 3 points (+3|-0)

The alternative media and the MSM go back and forth with this shit, makes 'em both less trustworthy

[–] Kannibal [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

If I recall correctly, Aristotle came up with a system for dealing with the bullshit. He called it logic.

Depends on facts that everyone can agree on, though

[–] Sarcastaway 2 points (+3|-1)

Its an even older trope of state sponsored propagandists to claim that anyone who disputes them is a liar.

Fuck off with this shit.

[–] Kannibal [OP] 2 points (+3|-1)

The FCC’s regulatory authority concerning journalism extends only to “over-the-air broadcasters who transmit their programs via the publicly owned spectrum,” not to cable television, satellite television, printed material, or the Internet. Thus the FCC has no power to enforce any supposed “press guidelines” against cable and satellite news networks such as CNN and MSNBC (or a news agency such as the Associated Press).

sorry no FCC raid against CNN

[–] Sarcastaway 1 points (+1|-0)

Suddenly the "cable" in "cable news" makes a lot more sense.

[–] jidlaph 1 points (+1|-0)

I think the biggest indicator that this story is false is that the MSM would be apoplectic about such a raid, but they haven't mentioned anything about it.

The Associated Press certainly didn't keep Obama's raid on them secret.

[–] Sarcastaway 3 points (+3|-0)

I didn't even read the article, and I should probably clarify that my statements are about Snopes, not this particular piece. Snopes loves to act like they have some sort of grasp on absolute truth that exceeds us mere mortals, and it comes across as hugely condescending.

I don't even disagree with Snopes most of the time, but journalists of all people should understand that the truth doesn't need gatekeepers. Even when those gatekeepers are good, the systems they put in place are always used to distort the truth if given enough time, which hurts the practice of journalism itself.

[–] RobertoAnderson 2 points (+2|-0)

The thing I dislike about Snopes the most is how fast they supposedly fact check "trending news" even in cases where it wouldn't be possible.

They either aren't doing their due diligence or are just rushing to get out some page somebody can link that essentially says the equivalent of

Is this news story true? We asked the people involved but they haven't said anything and it's been six hours so here's a bunch of non-related non-journalists saying this story isn't true.

They don't seem to realize that nobody that isn't a bit gullible believes they have completely, undeniably confirmed a story as false in under 24-48 hours.

[–] MirrorMan 2 points (+2|-0)

Not very much news is really fake. The devil is in what is promoted a d what is ignored. it is more telling what a source refuses to cover than what they do cover.

[–] doggone 0 points (+0|-0)

"Your News Wire" is low hanging fruit. In the context of your headline, a tired trope of "legitimate news organizations" is to propagate innuendo.

Has snopes made a stand on Russia collusion yet?

[–] Kannibal [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

they seem to have been responsibly cautious about the claims one way or another

https://www.snopes.com/?s=russian+collusion

your mileage may vary

especially if they don't suck up to your preferred heroes and news sources