FAKE NEWS

Ok Sup Forums, I've been wondering for a while. Where did this "fake news" bullshit come from, and were did it start? IS there any evidence to prove that the Liberals were the ones starting it? Give me all of the red pills.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=o_WBo4sfmi4
youtube.com/watch?v=xGG23CarcQw
npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/04/03/522503844/how-russian-twitter-bots-pumped-out-fake-news-during-the-2016-election
archive.is/cRzhu
buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.eqxDdzDX#.kj8mG1mX
archive.is/MM1Z9
newstatesman.com/world/2016/11/did-fake-news-facebook-swing-us-election
archive.is/ECHnJ
businessinsider.com/fake-presidential-election-news-viral-facebook-trump-clinton-2016-11
archive.is/GvisT
washingtonpost.com/business/economy/russian-propaganda-effort-helped-spread-fake-news-during-election-experts-say/2016/11/24/793903b6-8a40-4ca9-b712-716af66098fe_story.html
archive.is/LuAVh
cnbc.com/2017/04/27/facebook-to-fight-fake-news-groups.html
archive.is/iA14n
bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-06/facebook-starts-to-educate-users-on-how-to-spot-fake-news
archive.is/6wiN2
foxnews.com/tech/2017/04/14/facebook-rolls-out-features-to-curb-fake-news.html
archive.is/82PHp
businessinsider.com/facebook-how-to-spot-fake-news-2017-4
archive.is/rOJTT
washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/its-time-to-retire-the-tainted-term-fake-news/2017/01/06/a5a7516c-d375-11e6-945a-76f69a399dd5_story.html
archive.is/sG9DR
youtube.com/watch?v=RE8bQyUBvDY
youtube.com/watch?v=1IDF-8khS3w
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Liberals used it to describe the kinds of alternative news media that was being shared on social media, mostly by right-wingers and conservatives.

Trump and the right then co-opted the term to refer to the MSM and their dishonest tactics

The fact is there's a lot of "fake news" and bullshit on both sides, but the MSM definitely deserves the title a lot more

Originally it wasn't even used to qualify Breithbart or other right-wing outlets, it was about actual fake news websites.

Of which I cannot cite even one, because their audience is laughably small, but they tried to pretend like a large part of americans was influenced by it.

Until the word was stolen from them. By us. To qualify them.

I know there is legitimate Fake news out there. I was just wondering when the MSM started using it to try and harm Trump's election.

Once Trump called the MSM out on their bullshit; it was either own up to it or attack Trump.

You can't blindly trust anyone because fake news, unethical journalists, and false flags happen all the time and can favour either side. It's about not being a retarded nigger who isn't emotionally manipulated by the news and knows exactly what "evidence" means.
Also this. ^^^^
CIANiggers work with all western media, and if you don't think so you're a retard. If you blindly trust any single individual or news source, you're a retard. At any point in time, any reliable source of information can turn into pozzed kike shit, or vice versa.

I personally, have not watched the news in quite some time. I ironically get most of my news from Sup Forums. So when I see the shit they spin in the msm on other sites, I get really frustrated when I explain to people that their shit is wrong. They usually always deny that it is, or even the thought that places like cnn could be biased etc. These fucking sheep will be the reason bad things happen.

The MSM and left started using it to attack breitbart and etc first, Trump turned it on them easily.

>AP/Reuters
Gatekeepers who control the flow of information, completely and utterly vile institutions.

I'm no expert. Lately I am reading stories and I try to find source. I started doing this a few months ago. For science journals and all sorts of crap. Like to also read article source, study, whatever.

Start to notice sources on many things are sketchy at best. Start to see often that even regarding science at times, the quoted study may not exist, or instead says something different depending on interpretation. Sometimes study quoted barely involves article subject material.

Notice Trump stories. Look at sources. Most sources seem to be Washington Post. Maybe very few are New York Times. I'm talking about CNN stories, and MSNBC stories and all the mainstream stories have Washington Post as source.

Read Washington Post. Washington Post has no sources. Admits to having no documentation. Has nothing. Keep seeing this with Washington Post over and over. Meanwhile all mainstream news uses one article published by them and echoes it all over CNN and MSNBC.

So I am no expert on what's going on. I just see a lot that the mainstream news, all of it, uses Washington Post as it's primary and only source, and the Washington post has absolutely no source at all.

You wouldn't see much of it because it was mostly shared by old people on Facebook. Apparently a lot of the fake news came from unemployed eastern European web developers who had no stake in the election but generated the most revenue from writing fictional American right wing news.

Oh yes, I started doing this since the election. I was fucking angry at the lack of sources about literally everything anti-trump. Then, fucking google started removing new stories entirely, and made it impossible to find pro-trump anything.

If I had a nickel for every article that misinterpreted a scientific journal, or was incapable of drawing their own conclusions from the evidence within it, I'd be rich.

Pizzagate

This. The (((MSM))) had grown accustomed to completely controlling the narrative of elections.
>Exhibit A: Ron Paul
youtube.com/watch?v=o_WBo4sfmi4

Trump's meteoric rise and widespread popularity was quickly becoming a concern, and unlike Ron Paul they were unable to just "shut him down".
>if you're one of the "Trump was controlled OP from the start" crowd, it STILL makes sense that the (((MSM))) would want to discredit the emerging alt. media as potential future threats.
>it's been their primary weapon in the "Muh Russia" assault (Muh Russian twitter bots, Muh Bannon, Muh fake news facebook newsfeed)

So, they started memeing this term "fake news" in order to discredit Trump supporters/ anti-MSM voices online and regain control over the narrative. The major problem with this tactic was....almost nobody really trusted the MSM by this point.
>case and point: October 2016 Trump Rally
youtube.com/watch?v=xGG23CarcQw

It backfired, and the term has now been co-opted by the "alternative" media and has been over-used by both sides to the point of ineffectiveness.

You're on Sup Forums Sup Forums, every day you see bullshit conspiracy theories that Obama is running a shadow government, that Trump is an agent of Russia, that Hillary Clinton runs a pedophile ring and any second now this'll all be exposed and the arrests will start coming and you're really asking if fake news is real? Get a grip.

>but the MSM definitely deserves the title a lot more
Nothing is more fake than chemtrails and other ignorant bullshit, which the MSM never touches. You're an idiot if you really think MSM deserves the title over mentally ill people writing blog posts. Get a grip

Since nobody else has given a comprehensive answer, I'll give it a shot.

The term "fake news" first popped up shortly after the election as the Dems and the MSM were frantically searching for reasons why their girl lost even though it was her turn. One of the first "explanations" they came up with was that "fake news" spread on Facebook confused people into voting for Trump.

See:

>npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/04/03/522503844/how-russian-twitter-bots-pumped-out-fake-news-during-the-2016-election
archive.is/cRzhu

>buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.eqxDdzDX#.kj8mG1mX
archive.is/MM1Z9

>newstatesman.com/world/2016/11/did-fake-news-facebook-swing-us-election
archive.is/ECHnJ

>businessinsider.com/fake-presidential-election-news-viral-facebook-trump-clinton-2016-11
archive.is/GvisT

Note how all the above stories date to recently after Nov 9, when the MSM was still scrambling for a narrative to explain why all their predictions and forecasts were flat-out wrong for the past 2 years.

Then things reached a whole new level when WaPo released the following story, which was based on a group of anonymous "researchers" that called themselves "ProporNot" who apparently didn't even exist until after Nov 9. This group, among other things, claimed that Breitbart, Infowars, and even the fucking Ron Paul institute were engaged in disseminating propaganda for the Russian government:

>washingtonpost.com/business/economy/russian-propaganda-effort-helped-spread-fake-news-during-election-experts-say/2016/11/24/793903b6-8a40-4ca9-b712-716af66098fe_story.html
archive.is/LuAVh

Although most major newspapers panned the WaPo article, nonetheless, the MSM began shifting away from confining the term "fake news" to only include obvious faceberg-tier clickbait and started to apply the label to all non-mainstream news sources

MSM media picked up the term to go after Facebook and other social media for allowing "fake news to spread on people's feed." It orginally started with Hillary Clinton's email scandal. This was about the time you started to here from the likes of Facebook talking about "squashing fake news by fact checking people's feeds." As most of the news was considered "fake news" if it was about Hillary and her "fake" private email server. Then it came out that guess what? It wasn't so fake after all.

So then it got turned into just calling sites that where critical of Hillary as fake news. Like Breitbart. Which anyone who browsed Breitbart knew it was a load of bullshit.

But then Trump picked up the term and did the unthinkable. Not only called out the fake news coming out of the MSM, but CAUGHT them shitting out fake news and their clear bias.

And since then, they lost the term and hated it sense. Its one of the reasons why not only they, but also Facebook has really calmed down on using the term. Facebook and Twitter of course are doing everything in their power to censor any critical information about Democrats, Liberals, and Muslims, but they stopped talking about fake news and how they will stop it.

Still at it, huh sharia blue?

I'm not talking about news on here. I can tell if something is fake or not. I take everything with huge amounts of skepticism on here. I mostly just wanted to learn how to debate MSM fake news believers.

No, Trump is just an imbecile and the MSM rightfully called him out on it along with exposing the gullibility of his base by showing how they get fed mindgruel from these bullshit sources.

Imagine being a teacher and a group of students are so broken that they won't accept the actual answer, and instead tout some alternative textbook written by a megalomaniac that promises that there's a conspiracy to brainwash everyone into thinking 2 is the real answer to 1+1, and then some poor defective brains, of which nature creates many, who subscribe to this idea out of who knows, some comfort in conspiracy, and so they refuse to buy what the teacher says. The teacher is going to rag on that alternative source to the rest of the class, and call him fake. Because he is, and there's no way to hide that, as much as you may hate your asshole teacher, the truth is the truth, and the original fake news is capitalists preying on the weak for $ in the age of clicks

>sharia blue
Yeah and man I'm making bank. How's unemployment? Those jobs come back from overseas yet?

google search term usage: "fake news" versus "pizzagate"

it was literally in response to pizzagate in order to dismiss it, and we pulled a muh appropriation to fuc msm

...

Fuck off shill.

>HILLARY'S HEALTH CONCERNS WHERE FAKE NEWS AND DEBUNKED!
shortly after the election...
>well yes her health concerns were really real. she had phenomena and some other things

"Islam is a religion of peace" and "You habe a moral duty to feed starving Africans" are infinitely more destructive than chemtrails.

Never mind the fact that the other popular conspiracy theories, like water borne pollutants (pesticides and birth control) "turning the frogs gay" is unambiguously true.

And fluoride in the drinking water is bad, yes it can cross the blood brain barrier if there is heavy metal contamination in the water and there is almost always heavy metal contamination in the water (and may be natural if you're drawing from an aquifer)

Finally, yes, man made climate change is real, ocean acidification is a huge problem caused by CO2 being absorbed into the water, but it's also obvious that the plutocrats who have installed themselves as a global government are using it as a pretext to institute a global tax on all economic activity and enrich themselves at our expense. The real solution to climate change is to reduce the human population to reduce overall economic activity without lowering standard of living. This goes back to the world not needing billions of Africans or Muslims that they say we need to coexist with.

can't forget the patriots scandal with how the fake news MSM were trying to claim nearly no one showed up for trump based off of a single, photo angle.

really, this was real news being blasted on cnn, msnbc, abc, cbs, new york times, and shit.

...

con't

Then, in around April, all the MSM sites started cheering for Facebook to crack down on "fake news" (read: news from places other than the MSM).

>cnbc.com/2017/04/27/facebook-to-fight-fake-news-groups.html
archive.is/iA14n

>bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-06/facebook-starts-to-educate-users-on-how-to-spot-fake-news
archive.is/6wiN2

>foxnews.com/tech/2017/04/14/facebook-rolls-out-features-to-curb-fake-news.html
archive.is/82PHp

>businessinsider.com/facebook-how-to-spot-fake-news-2017-4
archive.is/rOJTT

Notice how all the above articles are dated in April: a coordinated attack by the MSM to silence all competing news sources that contradicted their narrative.

It was around this time when conservatives decided that enough is enough and turned the term around to attack the MSM. In our hands, the term has been super effective. So effective, in fact, that the MSM is sorry they ever came up with the term and now just wants it to go away. See:

>washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/its-time-to-retire-the-tainted-term-fake-news/2017/01/06/a5a7516c-d375-11e6-945a-76f69a399dd5_story.html
archive.is/sG9DR

So, that's the story in a nutshell. MSM invented the term to discredit their competitors and excuse Clinton from the blame for her own loss, and then it got used against them hard, much to their chagrin.

>2016 - obama administration, today's word is GUIDANCE. obama is only adding guidance to help guide public schools in allowing chicks with dicks to piss in women bathrooms.
>2017 - trump administration, today's word is PROTECTION. EVIL TRUMP IS REMOVING PROTECTION BY ALLOWING SCHOOLS NOT TO ALLOW CHICKS WITH DICKS TO PISS FREELY LIKE THE BUFFALO AND TRUMP WILL KILL GAYS.

You're off.
It was when the Podesta video was discovered. Same day if I remember correctly.
This wasn't about trump, it was about pedo damage control.

>Where did this "fake news" bullshit come from, and were did it start?
Gamergate.
The video game enthusiast press started really stretching the rules, and sites that are literally blogs with ads claimed to be journalists, without working by journalistic standards and ethics. They got called out for it(writing fluff pieces for the women you're fucking on the side), they cried "no way!" despite leaks proving otherwise, and once the video game enthusiast press had been picked apart, all their readers saw that the same shit was happening in the mainstream media as well, and probably had been for a long time(at least as far back as the press hiding FDR's polio/crippleness, which may have been ethical anyways in that it improved america's public image and morale).

Liberals got too cocky and woke the sleeping dragon(autists with a lot of free time and a chip on their shoulder to take things apart for being bullied in high school over Magic the Gathering and comic books at school)

I provided a ton of articles in both my posts that I think paint a pretty accurate picture of the timeline of the term's rise and popularity. You're welcome to point to articles and sources that you think establish that the term came to prominence at some other time.

sometimes the offical fact checkers that even google sponsors spread fake news.

...

Washington Post is Pravda

>phenomena

just posting this one because nate should really just leave. go home nate, you're drunk.

...

>noticing WaPo as the propaganda source material
Correctomundo, user. I noticed this shit too in about Dec of 2016

...

...

Yeah, pretty good summary. It all started with the Pizzagate stuff, but then evolved into calling all alternate media fake news.

You honestly think you know every detail and backroom deal that happens in Washington? How? I'm honestly flabbergasted based on the amount of shit that has come out of the government, unless you still want to deny things like MKUltra, Disposition Matrix and Mockingbird

>phenomena
we really don't know what she actually had, and still has. they tried claiming exhaustion at first from all the rallying she was doing! (come to find out, she was doing jack shit.) then they claimed pneumonia. then they kinda backpeddled on that and said she was as healthy as a horse. then claimed it was both a combination of exhaustion and pneumonia. then she started to have blackouts.

There's a big collage of this shit, someone post it.

I love how you think of yourselves as the good guys

That fake news shit started during the election when the left wanted to make lists of all "fake news" sites online, to make sure you get all the correct information. This list contained a shit ton of rightwing sites, such as Infowars, Drudge Report and Breitbart. Then Donald Trump started calling CNN the REAL fake news and everyone freaked out and started claiming he was attacking the press and the first amendment.

>Where did this "fake news" bullshit come from, and were did it start?

Right fucking here But surely this is only coincidence!

Lyin Brian literally came back from suspension for lieing to call other people fake news.

This headline is a perfect example of why Hillary lost the election.

She didn't need:
>White men
>Working class people
>people who live in "flyover" states
>Bernie supporters
>anyone she deemed a "deplorable"
>Centrists
>Conservatives
>people in general
It's amazing how she and everyone else thought she would win.

I disagree with your climate change. I say we integrate with nature so that more plantlife creates a larger and larger carbon sink. I would suggest on the small side to doing things like rooftop gardens, removing all nonimportant concrete and replacing with grass or a tree and creating phytoplankton utopias in massive swathes of ocean (kinda like how farmers rotate crops to keep the soil healthy).

On the extreme, I would suggest becoming Keebler elves and literally creating homes out of massive trees or some crazy shit like that. Truly integrate with nature.

Not only would we create more habitat for animals to live in, but with an easy campaign into Africa and South America, we could wipe them out and establish whole continents of greenery

SOME FINE ASS JOURNALISM!

(((Fake News))) started well before the 2016 election.

>white trump supporter punches a black anti-trump supporter
GOTTA MAKE SURE WE STATE THE VICTIMS RACE TO SHOWCASE HOW TRUMP SUPPORTERS ARE WHITE SUPREMACIST!
>black trump supporter punches white anti-trump supporter.
GOTTA MAKE SURE TO STATE! eeeerrrrrrr, wait, it was a BLACK TRUMP SUPPORTER?? PUNCHING A WHITE ANTI-TRUMP??

well shit, we gotta make sure not to mention any ounce of race in this one! this ruins the narrative!

...

...

(((Zucker)))

Obama used it when pizza gate was breaking.

They started the use of the term when we and reddit started figuring out their currency of blackmail, all stemming from the Clinton Foundation.

...

A MEMBER OF THE CROWD

Fuck these god damn bastards

>being this naive
The (((MSM))) does NOT care about you, it does not have your interests in mind, and it is not there to "tell you the truth". You don't have to be a Trump supporter to realize that you're being taken for a ride. They've been lying to ALL of us for decades.
>muh Iraqi WMDs
>muh Ron Paul/Buchanan is a joke
>muh Bernie/Jim Webb can't compete
>muh Russia/ muh Assad

It's not about Right vs. Left They ALL do the exact same shit in the end. Prop up Israel/Saudi Arabia, import cheap labor and push globalism.

Trump won because a lot of people thought he MIGHT stay true to his word, and that his Neo-con stances were a cover.
>Unless he's playing the greatest game of 80-d underwater checkers ever, it seems he's sold us all out too.

youtube.com/watch?v=RE8bQyUBvDY

>It was around this time when conservatives decided that enough is enough and turned the term around to attack the MSM

Actually, it was turned around on them a few months before that.

youtube.com/watch?v=1IDF-8khS3w

It's a good thing. The fake news isn't a new phenomenon, it's just a newly popularized term. You'd be a fool to think any media organization (mainstream or not) has ever been unbiased. It's good to have people be aware of this so they can think for themselves. Especially in America where every issue is constructed into a dichotomy because of their dumb two-party system. It's done quite a number on their intelligence.

This is the answer.

An obvious fake propaganda website propornot.com was promoted by WaPo/CNN/BuzzFeed.

Then everyone started calling MSM fake news and they got butthurt.