Again, the reason fake news has gained purchase recently is bc of major fail at traditional media. They cannot be separated.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel @zeynep
And WaPo more than any other outlet has to live by the terms it has adopted. It failed its own fake news criteria here.
1 reply 11 retweets 64 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
No it hasn't. Different mode of failure. So obviously so that I'm not sure there can be a serious discussion.
4 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @emptywheel
Reports story without sufficient techical understanding—then retracts. Can't tell that from "Pope endorses Trump" at click farm?
13 replies 2 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Let's try another one. Was Bret Baier's "Scoop" that Hillary was going to be indicted fake news?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Ah. No. Not as "fake news" came to be a topic. Egregious, deliberate misinformation, the news spectrum closest to fake news but+
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @emptywheel
still not the same thing. Doesn't make it benign. Just isn't identical.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
So how is that deliberate misinformation different from Pope endorses Trump misinformation?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Source, goal, ecology, ideology. Deliberate misinformation isn't new.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep
You're certain all the Pope endorses Trump people don't share pro-Trump ideology that FBI Agents leaking do?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I'm happy to say that algo-driven misinfo is different from human-driver misinfo. But neither should be called "fake news."
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.