How do the tell the difference between real news and fake news?

How do the tell the difference between real news and fake news?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38833590
vox.com/world/2017/1/29/14426892/trump-muslim-immigration-refugee-ban-isis-terrorism
youtube.com/watch?v=W8N3FF_3KvU&list=PLMNj_r5bccUw40CpD-JYXJyVsDYsj7ITD
independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-new-start-russia-vladimir-putin-nuclear-treaty-phone-call-latest-a7572281.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Research and trusted sources.

nice typo fake anglo.

both are bait tho

It's all fake, my man.
Gas the kikes.

>JOI
>not taboo
dropped

I am an immigrant from Latvia I am scared that UKIP will kill me

If it's pro-Trump, it's real news. Everything else is fake.

t. Alex Jones

just kill them before they kill you.

Anything important will be here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events

BUT I WANT PEACE

>implying she doesn't do femdom and incest stuff

No comment on how I know that.

...

Wiki leaks will help

>Understand that their is a global conspiracy trying to dissolve countries boarders and sovereignty

>Their is an agenda to make white people submissive

>Their is an agenda attacking western culture and way of life

>Their is an agenda trying to expand the reaches and powers of government

>If you see news promoting these ideals then it is fake and should not be trusted

Use your discretion, learn their tactics, and once you have it will be as easy as black and white to determine disinformation

A: use more than one source
B: don't use CNN or MS(((NBC)))
C: I don't mind AP as they typically just report without it ALWAYS being an oped
D: lurk more

Everything that fits my narrative is true. All else is 17-dimensional vampires

Who's that

For it to be real it has to only follow the agenda I follow

If it doesn't then it's fake news

What the fuck is Latvia? Aren't y'all white? WTF UK. We talked about this. Be nice to the whites. Remove kebab only.

Fake news uses the term "fake news"

so you are fake news?

UKIP wants to get rid of Europeans so they can bring in Pakistanis and Nigerians from their Commonwealth, it is quite scary. I just want Britm8s to have bants with in the pub!

AP and Reuters are good if you read their straight reports. They are both disgusting liberal bs if you read opinion pieces

...

'fake news' is now any news that does not abide by the liberal media code of conduct. if you dumb faggots didnt drive older white men to suicide with you autistic nonsense there would be strong men willing to rise up against the 'fake news' scheme, but as of now there are too many nu-male faggots that cant think.

hell, i see a few of them here.

THICCCCCC

If they do you win so don't worry

drudgereport
daily caller
breitbart
if not its fake news
as proven by trump election
cancel cable tv and netflix
dont use apple or oracle or google
bing.com fine or samsung phone or ubuntu phone

You look into more than one article + apply critical thinking (not critical theory you marxist scum don´t get any ideas) + wait about one-two days before "deciding your opinion" then adjusting said opinion if new, decently credible, information arises.

Also a shortlist: All cultural marxist propaganda (including bolshevism by (((them)))) is of course marked Fake News instantly.

Muslims know the truth still. Might makes Right. Everything else is literally Fake News. Molyneux is correct about this : there is no "peaceful taxation", you do it OR ELSE.

Not AnCap but it´s a good example. You are bribing the state to be left alone & """kept safe""".

Real News is REALLY boring and doesn't contain any value judgements.

For example: "X happened at Y place on Z date" is how news is delivered in a dry and objective manner.

Another key consideration is to note whether complete quotes are used and how thoroughly documented any citations are. If they are quoting someone, they should provide the full relevant paragraph of what was said, then say when and where it was said. Partial quotes or sentences with fragments of quotes are giveaways that the meaning of what was said is being altered. More so if the statement about what was said is completely lacking in quotation marks of any kind.

if its being spewed by an acronym'd agency, you know its fake.

>CNN, MSNBC, NBC,ect

if not, you need to dig in and look for facts and biased, even if coming from Fox or townhall, ect.

Yeah and Snopes is also great right user.
>2017
>Trusting wikipedia or any mainstream "news aggregate"

There's no essential difference, every piece of news you see has a social and ideological effect on people, and that effect is real.

>Real news (shows videos and photos to prove what you are saying)
Even though photos and videos can be faked
>Fake news (information that has no way to be proved and most likely just fake stuff to provoke controversy or videos and photos that are fake)

Wikileaks may be the more credible way to go about this but the muh conspiracy documentaries & "movies" on youtube is way better & faster. Sure there is some disinfo & crazy shit mixed in, but this just makes it more mythological & interesting.

The electric universe is a real cool theory. Bit unrelated just a tip for Youtube addicts.

Fake News often lacks a comments section cause they don't want to allow even the appearance that people can question it

This is the problem user, he isn´t afraid of UKIP it´s the british government hating on whites = he is afraid but doesn´t know why because Slav IQ.

This bitch is disgusting. I've become so desensitized to porn that now I occasionally need to watch a lactating man with huge gynecomastia man boobs get tit fucked but I still couldn't tolerate this bipch's farting videos.

Nothing kills a boner faster than a cuck who is willing to get humiliated on the internet by revealing his penis for all the world to see while some chubby bitch who refuses to show her nipples farts in his face for 30 minutes.

Read between the lines and always use your common sense and understanding of the world to draw conclusions. For example:

>UKIP leader makes a speech in the EU parlament
>completely blows them the fuck off on Trump (as you can see from the video)
>Labour MEP desperately needs a way to derail his IRL shitposting
>Holds meme-sign to cause a distraction

But the most influential and highly respected media wouldn't fall for bullshit like that, would they? Wrong:

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38833590

Conclusions:
>BBC has as much credibility as a random blog. Any blog you like.
>BBC has an agenda, but are not transparent about it (right wing media might be biased, but at least are transparent about their stance)

Second example:
vox.com/world/2017/1/29/14426892/trump-muslim-immigration-refugee-ban-isis-terrorism (Just google Trump Muslim Ban ISIS)

ISIS are getting their information from their Internet, and mass media creates nothing but hysteria about objectively false information. They are either completely retarded or the enemy.

>I told my 7 y/o daughter Trump will kill her. She's been crying for 30 min now, SEE WHAT THIS MAN DOES?

Read how the opposite side treats the same issue and compare the two.

I remember this from my childhood, the news anchors on TV would report it just like this.

And then the family would discuss or comment if it was anything interesting. Today, watching US news, I feel like they confused idiot talk shows with news reporting.

the source

A good way to tell is if the news you're watching is on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, FOX -- it's going to be fake news.

Kys this is not what he is asking, not the topic of the discussion nor the point of Fake News.

Some are meant to evoke emotions indeed, some are false flags (like the "anti-muslim right wing attacs" bullshit) to subvert or provoke. BUT the actuality of the statement is : outright lies or complete wordtwists = fake news.

Basically what the MSM does in the West. Probably NK & all the rest of the world as well but who watches their news.

This is a quick way to see if you should be reading the article / newssite in the first place yes.

Also all of these OpEds that most normies and even me often confuse for an actual article which the whole newspaper "stands for" etc.

Link to video please

Every news is manipulation and reality distortion, 'fake' news is pleonasm, there's no intent whatsoever to inform you. That's why there's no essential difference.

Well you stated the solution to your problem in your post user. Awareness is the first step of change. Try one week & try to jerk without porn on that Sunday. Gl

>8 y/o daughter
FTFY

Another way to put it is that the problem is not that such and such report is fake or that channel or other is lying, but that the media DECIDES what's 'important' to know in the first place, if the reports on the issue are true or not is irrelevant because the issue is already implanted in your brain.

But the degrees user, they do matter. Humans do this daily when telling stories of past times / what they ate the day before / that they are going to pee (actually to shit quickly). So yes nearly all reporting will distort facts or lean into one manipulation or another.

Still there is massive difference between for example CNN & Drudge. imho

youtube.com/watch?v=W8N3FF_3KvU&list=PLMNj_r5bccUw40CpD-JYXJyVsDYsj7ITD

>Trying to be sexy posing
>Starts jerking off her imaginary dick

What did she mean by this?

Yah but one problem is the MSM used ACTUAL fake news sites like the Onion-tier stuff, to show the public that "this stuff happens" and then they somehow tried to link this shit to Infowars, Pizzagate, real reportings on Trump (like old videos showing he basically always wanted to save the US from being fucked by Chyna in trade) etc.

The MSM fucked up bigly and deserve all the shit they get from now and until they fail or bend the knee (to more honest reporting - not the God Emperor)

It´s you user. She´s using your mirror-neurons to make you mimic her motions & sensations, like humans do.

You´re not an aspie with deficient mirror-neurons are you user?

Probably telling the camera to stroke it, and her handmovement is there to encourage the viewer.

I'm not news

by comparing it to police blotter, court records, congressional record and obituary column or coroner's reports

The best way to get factual information is to take it in from multiple sources while being cognizant of the expected bias. There are no unbiased sources anymore, every journalist now works for somebody with an agenda.

I get a lot of good info from the NYT. Their investigative fact-checking is unparalleled in the industry, they do care about protecting their reputation. Their liberal bias is common knowledge so it's easy enough to read around.

Basically I stick with news organizations that are self-sourced, do their own investigating, their own "journalism." Aggregators are only looking for page-clicks and therefore tend to feature sensationalism over substance.

The one predominant feature of the Information Age is, though, that you now have to read a LOT of information to discern the truth of a matter.

If it sounds too good to be true, it's most likely not.

>Starts jerking off her imaginary dick

Look closer, user - pretty sure that's not imaginary

You're not supposed to be able to.

The left have flipped the narrative now to deal with the fact that reality is too difficult to outright conceal. Now they are telling normies to be "critical" of anything and everything, with the implicit suggestion that instead of simply being skeptical, they can deny and ignore real news that goes against the narrative as being "fake news".

This is designed to keep the now-constant drip of rapes, murders, terror plots and demographic displacement milestones from being registered in the subconscious of the people.
Previously people were inculcated with the reflex to believe the news and not do any digging beyond skimming the headlines, which is all the average person does in terms of getting facts to establish a worldview upon.
Now they are actively trying to disassociate news reports and headlines with facticity by spreading this "fake news" meme. People will see headlines like "child grooming gang convicted" and their programming will kick in to tell them that it's "fake news", protecting the leftist narrative from being chipped away.

It's genius. The right should study books like "Propaganda" to understand how they keep getting away with it.

fpbp

I generally just go off, if they report the facts and only facts it's probably credible. The second personal bias and view comes into it, dosregard it. I notice a lot of publications "poison the well" right at the start of an article

How to tell you're getting fake news:
>[party] is always right
>([party]*-1) is always wrong
>appears to be reporting strictly facts and leaving opinion aside yet all the facts lead up to a biased conclusion
>different news casters have same opinion and report same events almost identically
>news report doesn't cite facts or evidence but instead appeal to emotion
>news caster talks down to you like you're too stupid to formulate your own opinion
>news article demonizes specific person by either not quoting them or taking a quote out of context

How to tell you're getting real news:
>news caster is honest about their biases
>news caster has clearly defined moral code of conduct
>news caster is honest about events and analyzes them consistent with their morality
>news caster is able to rationally defend their opinions or personal interpretation of events in a factual manner

It's rare to find unbiased sources so the next best thing is to find people who can at least defend their opinions while recognizing their polarity on the political spectrum. There are people on both sides of the aisle who can present facts and arguments in a fair way without having to take things out of context or resort to a simple "if you do [x] you're a bad person because you hurt [y]'s feelings".

U don't know shit about Egyptian history they hated Akhenatens weird art style and changed it back immediately after. He wasn't even a really powerful pharoh he was just a weird gay leader. His sun returned Egypt to glory. You guys are so fucking stupid I'm so mad right now I forgot how retarded the average person was on this website. Literally all of you are dumb as fuck.

Been trying to quit for about a year. The longest I could get away was maybe about two months. I quit 4chimps too during that period but here I am again, mashing F5 in between masturbating to forced bisexual lactating futa incest.

Never would I have imagined that porn could be an addiction. If someone had told me 2 years ago that they were addicted to porn, I would've called them a retarded spineless brainwashed faggot but now look at me. Look at what I've become. About to go masturbate right now.

independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-new-start-russia-vladimir-putin-nuclear-treaty-phone-call-latest-a7572281.html

>Two of the people who described the conversation were briefed by current administration officials who read detailed notes taken during the call. One of the two was shown portions of the notes. A third source was also briefed on the call.

>Reuters has not reviewed the notes taken of the call, which are classified.

Two sources, who aren't named, were briefed on the call and shown the notes. A third was also briefed. The notes are classified.

We're to assume that 1) Trump has agents all around him leaking information to his detriment due to this and other stories. We assume this because obviously any reasonable person would believe this to be the case, the man is a Nazi. We're also to assume he's so incompetent that these people, if they ever existed, weren't purged. We're also to assume the notes, which are classified, were shown to these sources in violation of the SF312 anyone with a clearance has signed.