What's Next

List of Known Fake News Sites in South Africa (and beyond)

lexity said:
Where would you slot in some of the better known SA media outlets?

News24: column1, row1
Click to expand...

It would like entirely different as our country has a few power centres and a distributed intellectual culture.
Pro Afrikaans Liberal
Pro Afrikaans Conservative
Pro ANC, pro English etc
 
Slootvreter said:
FCKEN fake news sites need to be taken down :mad: :sick:
Click to expand...
So you believe in sensorship. This could have widespread impacts including the shutdown of the BBC. Who will decide what is fake news? Have a look at www.wearethevoters.com that tries to reflect sustainable life for humans on earth. Click on cells in the table to see the reason for ratings. Feedback will be added in the future.
 
Shumifan49 said:
So you believe in sensorship. This could have widespread impacts including the shutdown of the BBC. Who will decide what is fake news? Have a look at www.wearethevoters.com that tries to reflect sustainable life for humans on earth. Click on cells in the table to see the reason for ratings. Feedback will be added in the future.
Click to expand...
Not censorship, only sites that report utter nonsense, such as things thay never happened. Actual lies masquerading as satire. Not sites that are perceived to be biased, slanted towards an agenda, etc etc. For those you can cross reference other sites to get both sides and draw your own conclusions.

Hinnews, GossipmillSA, etc. A lot of them seem to have been shut down though.
 
Slootvreter said:
lexity said:
Would that include news which was based on altered definitions?
Click to expand...
For me, it's reporting events that actually never happened at all.
Click to expand...
For example, if the accepted definition of famine, at say 75% of country X's adult population, changed.

And then someone published a news item which reported country X, to be experiencing a famine. And the reason they could report this factually, was because the number had been changed to 65%.

Note: you as the unsuspecting reader were not given the context, just the 'fact' this country was officially experiencing a famine. (You may not have even been aware of the original number)

If the actual number was 70%, would that be an example of an event that never happened/is not happening?
 
lexity said:
For example, if the accepted definition of famine, at say 75% of country X's adult population, changed.

And then someone published a news item which reported country X, to be experiencing a famine. And the reason they could report this factually, was because the number had been changed to 65%.

Note: you as the unsuspecting reader were not given the context, just the 'fact' this country was officially experiencing a famine. (You may not have even been aware of the original number)

If the actual number was 70%, would that be an example of an event that never happened/is not happening?
Click to expand...
Get down to defining what is fake and not all you want. I was clear on what I consider fake news.

An article that hits social media and goes viral saying Israel has launched a nuclear attack on Russia, would be fake, because it nevee happened, no matter how you twist it.

I speak only for myself. It's easy to cross reference events on multiple "reputable" sites and see what is going on and choose which one's slant you like the most.
 
Slootvreter said:
Get down to defining what is fake and not all you want. I was clear on what I consider fake news.

An article that hits social media and goes viral saying Israel has launched a nuclear attack on Russia, would be fake, because it nevee happened, no matter how you twist it.

I speak only for myself. It's easy to cross reference events on multiple "reputable" sites and see what is going on and choose which one's slant you like the most.
Click to expand...
Hellooooo..... I was attempting to make a point your stated position doesn't address.

You do realize at some point in the recent past the definition of 'aggression' was altered to include insults, right? US foreign policy has done a complete 180, since its secession/founding.

Interpretation of real world events is downstream of definitions. Ignorance is strength, War is peace, Offense is defense.

The power to define/redefine terms trumps limits on State power over the individual. #LordActon

When CNN tells you the US military's jack-booting their way across the planet is about peace-keeping, is that fake news? Or does it depend on how they define 'peace'?
 
lexity said:
Hellooooo..... I was attempting to make a point your stated position doesn't address.

You do realize at some point in the recent past the definition of 'aggression' was altered to include insults, right? US foreign policy has done a complete 180, since its secession/founding.

Interpretation of real world events is downstream of definitions. Ignorance is strength, War is peace, Offense is defense.

The power to define/redefine terms trumps limits on State power over the individual. #LordActon

When CNN tells you the US military's jack-booting their way across the planet is about peace-keeping, is that fake news? Or does it depend on how they define 'peace'?
Click to expand...
I've explained my interpretation of fake news numerous times.

Whether I find slanted or biased articles trustworthy, another story for another day.
 
Slootvreter said:
I've explained my interpretation of fake news numerous times.

Whether I find slanted or biased articles trustworthy, another story for another day.
Click to expand...
You repeated yourself numerous times, without answering my question.

And finally imply you may be prepared at some point in the future to consider the question.

Nice going.

Non-Confront-Howto-101
 
www.ronpaulinstitute.org

Microsoft Company Pushes Discredited GDI Blacklist Targeting Conservative and Libertarian Sites

I have been writing about the controversial funding of the Global Disinformation Index by the congressionally-creating and federal funded National...
www.ronpaulinstitute.org www.ronpaulinstitute.org

I have been writing about the controversial funding of the Global Disinformation Index by the congressionally-creating and federal funded National Endowment for Democracy. I recently disclosed that, after my Hill column ran, NED contacted me to say that it was stopping any further funding of the GDI. However, major questions still remain on the NED’s funding of this highly flawed scoring system that targeted conservative and libertarian sites.
Click to expand...
 
What do you make of this twitter profile: https://twitter.com/PSAFLIVE

They are constantly spewing "news" articles about foreigners committing crime in SA (and in so doing spurring on xenophobia). I am unable to confirm if the "news" is actually fake, factually incorrect, or just cherry-picking news with a bias.
 
Mobus said:
What do you make of this twitter profile: https://twitter.com/PSAFLIVE

They are constantly spewing "news" articles about foreigners committing crime in SA (and in so doing spurring on xenophobia). I am unable to confirm if the "news" is actually fake, factually incorrect, or just cherry-picking news with a bias.
Click to expand...
It's clearly an account created by some group of individuals that is hostile to markets that are open to competition.

If every voluntary trade is a win-win - which we know 'a priori' they are - then it is pure ignorance and possibly worse, willful ignorance, to overtly act against any person operating in open markets.

As to whether it is fake news, I think the premise is flawed. Whether something is news or not is subjective. Yes one can report incidents that were contrived or are staged or just made up. But ultimately, by traditional Western legal standards, it is the individual who properly-speaking has the responsibility to evaluate any new information that comes his way, before acting on it. And if he breaks the criminal law, in the process, he is responsible.

If he was acting under duress at the time, he would be have the burden of proof/exculpatory evidence.
 
lexity said:
Will be interesting to see the reaction to this...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1676646935514456081
Click to expand...
Scary.

He who controls AI, controls the future. Hence why Biden et al are going after it, of course with Big Corp’s blessing since they are two peas in a pod.

Soon to be the easiest way to manipulate the young and/or ignorant, as people shift away from TV to online info/news consumption.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top