The scourge of fake news.

[Kobuk]

Who can we trust anymore?

Throughout the Presidential Election and especially in the days and weeks afterward, there has been continued criticism, backlash, etc. about the rise of various news media sites and social media sites distorting and twisting the news to suit their own needs and/or that of others, with the public caught in the middle and not sure who to trust anymore and what to believe.

With everything that has gone on, what are your thoughts about how the media displays the news? Should media and social sites be held to a higher standard of reporting? And if so, how? How has the onslaught of fake news changed your way of looking at and thinking about the media? Has it made you change your viewing and reading habits when it comes to getting news from magazines, tv, radio, Internet, etc.?

[Varg the wanderer]

I think there has always been twisting of the news to suit political interests. Not to mention that just as much can be said about manipulating things by what is not reported rather that by what it. Something drastic can be happening, but if it portrays the company's candidate in a negative light you won't hear a peep out of them about it.

Now that there is a lot more competition people have other alternatives for news, and things that were once easy to keep under wraps by simply not reporting them are now difficult to contain simply by the sheer number of people reporting news.

[Old Rabbit]

Most of the fake news has been on the internet especially Facebook and other
social media sites.

The major media like NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox often have mis leading reports
but usually  not altogether fake. or lies. Most of what I have seen is not reporting
the part of the truth that makes one canidate or the other look good or bad. They
want to look unbiased, but they often are not.

Talk radio is one of the worst places to get good information as they are working to
build as large of an audience as possible. So they tell people what they think their
audience wants to hear. Much like a politician would.

We have to remember the major outlets are in business, and generally make reports
that are of interest to most people. Usually NPR is less biased, but they do lean
to the left on most issues.  I find those outlets like MSNBC, and Fox who spend time
talking to the canidates or their paid supporters give us more info than the rest. At least
in more depth. I usually watch MSNBC because it's commentators are more liberal.

One reason Trump had so much time on the news is because he has been so outlandishly
different. What would have killed the chances of most politicians only made Trump more
appealing to the the average conservative voter. Clinton had been vilified for years by the
GOP so it wasn't hard for Trump, and the fake media to convince many voters she was the
worst choice.

[Rocket T. Coyote]

There was a massive effort to make Hilrod likeable/acceptable. SNL skits, the woman president series with Geena Davis, and the current Madame Secretary television series, plus celebrity endorsements. Major polls had her ahead or even with Trump when her rallies were usually poorly attended by comparison. I believe that she was out-spending Trump as well.

[Old Rabbit]

There was a massive effort to make Hilrod likeable/acceptable. SNL skits, the woman president series with Geena Davis, and the current Madame Secretary television series, plus celebrity endorsements. Major polls had her ahead or even with Trump when her rallies were usually poorly attended by comparison. I believe that she was out-spending Trump as well.

Yes I am sure much money was spent trying to offset the conspeacy theirys about
Clinton. I am sure like most of use she isn't perfect and likely has used her popularity
to make money.

Now we have Trump a mon who lives to make a dollar. A man who fires people because
he doesn't like their looks. He doesn't hire people because they wear a beard or other
faceual hair. That's his privilege, but seems pretty  petty to me. It will be interesting to
see how truthful he was during his campain, and his so called Thank you rallies.

Too much money is spent on elections in this country. the senate race in my state
cost well over 100 million , and the man who won is in the back pocket of  big
business..

The public really needs to take elections more serious. We have many crooks in
government because the people don't take the time to check the facts about
candidates, and their history.

[Howie_Noble]

Who can we trust anymore? ... How has the onslaught of fake news changed your way of looking at and thinking about the media? Has it made you change your viewing and reading habits when it comes to getting news from magazines, TV, radio, Internet, etc.?

"Believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you see." - Benjamin Franklin
I think that if even one is found to mislead in any way or falsify, none of them can be trusted. It's my opinion that unfortunately the vast majority of all the news sources pander to the highest bidder.   

However I also think that when this country mandates and executes equal media time & advertising funding to/for each and all political parties nominees running for the pres. election, (not to mention all the other positions in all branches) then just maybe we'll get closer to a system becoming more reasonable and mature. When/if that happens, I'll give it my ear.

[Rocket T. Coyote]

Fake news is not a recent phenomenon, it has been with us as propaganda and/or disinformation. Remember pickups exploding in side collisions?  Military-style rifles firing full-auto? SUVs causing accidents? I even recall a local story broadcast claiming that some clergyman's "little books" were wildly popular. It all depends on who's writing the story and what narrative they wish to advance. Half-truths--like half bricks--can be thrown twice as far. These stories are seldom challenged, so they become accepted as authentic.

[Old Rabbit]

It's rather interesting. When fake news was helping Trump he was all for it. Lately
some has been putting him in a bad light. Guess what? He doesn't like Fake news
now.

It's not always easy to spot fake news, but I think most of the major media is trying
to print the facts. The big thing I do notice with the major press is they tend to print
the news they like, and drop what they don't. So it's factual in part, but sometimes
not saying is almost as bad as a lie. Polititicans are bad at telling half truths.

The government does keep a voting record of those in our legislature. So find that
record and you can see what your representive supports.

[Acton]

There are few  areas of fake news: first fitting  the news around a narrative rather than reporting facts by investing and interviewing the subject. Second  reporting  what  newspapers reported, but  do not check  the facts.  Third reporting  by goggling a web page and cut and paste as a story.   During  the election,  the media  simply  defaults  of setting up a narrative and fitting the news  around the narrative instead  of reporting the facts. In the Primary Trump was the candidate, and during the general election campaign Hillary was up  by  four point and would win the election. It was not lost on me  95% of the  "reports" were reported talking to reporters. I cannot  remember any report were the entire story was based taking to  ether the campaign or a man of the street report. 
But also I concern how the media has given up  investigate and interview journalism for cut and pasting what is found  on Google. I use Google  aggregation to find news stories for my Hello Kitty and  Furry blogs.  One too  many new sites just cut a past a story for another new site without  any fact check  on the  source.   Leaving politics did you remember  the “touching” story of  the Five Year Old dying  in Santa’s arm.  It was  reported  by the Knoxville News-Sentinel and the national and international news agencies repeated t he story, unvetted  until it was uncritically reported as  fact.  Upon reexamining the story, Knoxville News-Sentinel had to disclaimer that  they could not prove or disprove the facts of the story.
Bring this home closer  to Furry fandom I feel the source of poor representation of the fandom is due to  fitting the story around  a narrative,  repeating the story unvetted, and reporting based on the internet and web pages  instead of fandom . For example most news story the narrative is   “people how dress up in animal consumes,. The press fits  fandom around this narrative  by ether not going to  the fandom, or using  close up and crop shots  of fursuits,  but never doing a simple  headcount of  fursuiters  vs. attendees.  Second  the source of  many stories are repeated by other news media  unvetted.  Finally I sees cases where  the source  for a new story  was form a web source  that was ether parody sited  or unproven.

[Old Rabbit]

I had hoped back in the late 1980's with the beginning of the
internet, it would provide more of the facts about things that are
important to the public at large.  Unfortuantly many people
use the internet misleading rather than informing. Either
due to misunderstanding the facts or by design.

Hopefully more people will try to find the truth rather than believing
conspiracy theories and untruths about people. Generally one can look
at what people have done in the past to find out what they are at heart.
Some do change beliefs over time, but we have to look even closer to
be sure.

[Kobuk]

Trump didn't attend the White House Correspondents dinner this week again. He's still on his little tirade throwing a temper tantrum about how the media is bad and publishing fake news.

So in this era of "fake news", what can be done do you think to make news organisations more responsible and trustworthy again? What would it take? Do we have to have the government take control of all media and have state run media like in dictatorial countries? God, I certainly hope not.
How do we get editors, reporters, and other staff to be more accountable? Is it really the editors and reporters fault for the fake news being spread? Or is it the "higher ups" like the corporate executives that need to be more accountable because all they care for is the "ratings" and how well news sells.
How can we teach the future generations of people in college right now who are taking cources in media journalism to be better reporters and learn fact from fiction, right from wrong, etc.?