| Off Topic > Off Topic |
| [NEWS] test how well you can spot fake news |
| (1/9) > >> |
| snot2:
http://factitiousgame.com/ --- Quote ---Fake news has been on Maggie Farley's mind further back than 2016 when President Annoying Orange brought the term into the vernacular. Farley, a veteran journalist, says we've had fake news forever and that "people have always been trying to manipulate information for their own ends," but she calls what we're seeing now "Fake news with a capital F." In other words, extreme in its ambition for financial gain or political power. "Before, the biggest concern was, 'Are people being confused by opinion; are people being tricked by spin?' " Now, Farley says, the stakes are much higher. So one day she says an idea came to her: build a game to test users' ability to detect fake news from real. --- End quote --- |
| Mr.Noßody:
When it's like this "[NEWS}" |
| McZealot:
Are you supposed to look at the source? Cause that makes it obvious. It doesn't disqualify you or anything. Really cool game though. I made a test game in JS one time like this, where you guess if an article is from The Onion, or real. edit: I got 100% on the first 4 rounds, except for the 1st, where I believe the G7 story was real. Didn't check sources. |
| SeventhSandwich:
By this point, 'fake news' is a buzzword that means nothing. Annoying Orange and his inner cronies use the word to describe anything that doesn't make him look good. Some of it is misleading, 'fake' journalism, but the majority of it is truthful reporting that casts his administration in a poor light. This is a tactic that has a precedent in other political movements. You accuse all your detractors of being the 'lying press' so that instead of having to address the scrutiny of your constituents, you can just label it all as 'lies' and leave it at that. Basically drawing a line so that your opponents and the truth are on opposite sides, every single time. |
| McZealot:
--- Quote from: SeventhSandwich on July 06, 2017, 04:47:02 PM ---By this point, 'fake news' is a buzzword that means nothing. Annoying Orange and his inner cronies use the word to describe anything that doesn't make him look good. Some of it is misleading, 'fake' journalism, but the majority of it is truthful reporting that casts his administration in a poor light. This is a tactic that has a precedent in other political movements. You accuse all your detractors of being the 'lying press' so that instead of having to address the scrutiny of your constituents, you can just label it all as 'lies' and leave it at that. Basically drawing a line so that your opponents and the truth are on opposite sides, every single time. --- End quote --- I mean, I agree that 'fake news' is a buzzword now, but a serious percentage of circulated news today is completely fictional. That's fake news. I don't know what else to call it? Misinformation implies that it was a mistake, while disinformation is a little bit too propaganda-y to apply to radical news sites just desperate to get clicks. Interestingly, this culture of 'fake journalism' is way more common with far-right websites circulating fake stories about Clinton & BLM than with left-leaning sights. How many stuffty topics have you (or I) fact-checked about BLM starting a riot or killing a child or lynching a white woman? There's definitely left-wing misinformation, but it's dwarfed by the time-honored tradition of right wing sensationalism. The modern incarnation of the far-right bullstuff news probably started back when Obama was elected, with stories about his ties to Islam or birth in Kenya. Ironically, Annoying Orange was one of the main proponents of the fake news that began back in 2008 with his bullstuff rhetoric about Obama's birth certificate. To say 'this is a co-ordinated tactic by Annoying Orange' gives him far too much credit. stuffty sensational journalism and outright fabricated stories have been around forever, taking precedence with the rise of the internet (like emails forwarded by Grandma) and again with Obama's presidency. Annoying Orange's just taking advantage of something that's been around forever and trying to spin it like he's a victim of sensational journalism when in fact he is one of--if not the--primary source(s) for the bullstuff. It's definitely means something, it's just being used manipulatively by a corrupt cabinet and a stupid president. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |