[vectorpush]

> you don't get to define fake news. Fake news is as simple as it sounds: articles that are factually incorrect.

I'm happy to debate the nuance of the term fake news, but I think it's ironic that you presume to glibly assert your own definition of fake news right after exclaiming that one cannot do so (unless you're suggesting that CNN and myself, in particular, are forbidden from doing so).

Anyway, fake news is not simply "articles that are factually incorrect", otherwise every misreported fact or journalistic error could be classified as fake news which any intellectually honest person will admit is not what is intended to be described by the term fake news. Further, something cannot be fake news if it is not "news". Random images floating around the internet is not news. People posting memes and rumors on social media is not news. Honestly, even partisan bias and selective reporting by news organizations is not "fake news", and the terms "bias and selective reporting" accurately convey those qualities. Fake news is a loaded pejorative that carries the baggage of the 2016-2017 zeitgeist, so if you're going to use it at all, stick to the definition that common sense would have given us prior to 2016: reporting of current events that is deliberately presented as true when the authors know it is false.

[axaxs]

and tell me again, based on your own definition, how all news isn't fake news? Fake news was pushed heavily as a term by the 'liberal media' until it was pushed back against them and they threw a fit and tried to redefine it. In reality, all modern news is fake news. Every outlet has a left or right agenda, and shapes the news in that way based on clever editing, lies, and omissions. Let's call a spade a spade, and admit that all factually incorrect articles, infographics, and stories are what they are...fake news.

edit: these comments are mostly made out of frustration with news today. Maybe I'm old, i know that i'm older than the median here now. News was different as a kid. There's always been biases, but less subtle. And 'news' used to be the gold standard in editing and investigating. Now, I see error prone articles that seem to have no editing at all, and swings toward propoganda on both sides. Maybe it's a reflection of our own ignorance and biases. But to me, it's the great fall of media, debasing the term 'news'

[mistermann]

> In reality, all modern news is fake news.

This is the correct answer. Surely there must be a blog out there that deconstructs "news" articles from highly respected sources pointing out what people think is news is actually propaganda....anyone?

[vectorpush]

> and tell me again, based on your own definition, how all news isn't fake news?

That's a pretty disingenuous response. Obviously, "all news" is not deliberate fabrication presented as truth, and to suggest as much is worthless cynical hyperbole or willful ignorance or both.

For example, if I load up CNN.com right now, the tag-line for the front-page story reads "Another blow to Trump's travel ban". Clicking through to the article yields the headline "Appeals court upholds block on Trump's travel ban". You can read the article here:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/25/politics/4th-circuit-travel-ba....

This is not fake news. The 4th Circuit court really did uphold the block on Trump's travel ban. Here is an excerpt FTA:

> Judge Paul Niemeyer, one of the three dissenters, said the majority "looks past the face" of the executive order. The approach "adopts a new rule of law that uses campaign statements to recast the plain, unambiguous, and religiously neutral text," Niemeyer, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote. "Opening the door to the use of campaign statements to inform the text of later executive orders has no rational limits."

I will reiterate: this is not fake news, Judge Paul Niemeyer really is a 4th circuit judge and those really are his words. Do you understand what I'm saying here? This is a thing that happened in the real world, it is not a fabrication created by CNN to defame Trump, this is reporting of a noteworthy current event that merits news coverage. A critic of CNN might claim "CNN always reports negative stories about Trump". Fine. Selective reporting meets the definition of bias, but bias, once again, is not fake news.

We can perform the same exercise with Fox News. The front-page tag-line reads "TWISTED TREACHERY - ISIS tricked US into bombing building where 100 innocents held captive". Clicking through to the article yields the headline "ISIS rigged explosives to home where 100 civilians died in US-led airstrike, military says". You can read the article here:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/05/25/isis-rigged-explosiv....

This is not fake news. The military really did report that ISIS tricked them into bombing civilians. Here is an excerpt FTA:

> An investigation into the March bombing found that the terror groups rigged a house with over 1,000 pounds of explosives, put civilians in the basement, and employed two ISIS snipers on the roof to bait the U.S.-led coalition to attack. U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Matthew Isler, the investigating officer for US Central Command, told Pentagon reporters that the bomb used by the American jet, a GBU-38 (500-lb bomb), would not have caused the type of damage associated with the destruction of the building.

I will reiterate: this is not fake news, Air Force Brig. Gen Matthew Isler really is a U.S. Air Force Brigadier General, and those really are his words. Am I making myself crystal clear? This is a thing that happened in the real world, even if civilians are not in a position to corroborate the findings of a military investigation, this is the official report from the military and not a fabrication created by Fox to excuse or justify the U.S. bombing of civilians. A critic of Fox might claim "Fox News always defends the military, even when they kill innocent civilians". Fine. Publishing stories with a tone favorable to one's predefined narrative meets the definition of bias, but bias, once again, is not fake news.

You see what I'm getting at here?

> Let's call a spade a spade, and admit that all factually incorrect articles, infographics, and stories are what they are...fake news.

Simply posting something on the internet does not make it news and you are actually contributing to the "debasing of the term news" that you complain about by refusing to acknowledge the distinction between memes posted to facebook, factual errors in reporting, institutional bias, and deliberate fabrications with no basis in reality. I mean, you're argument is literally "all news is fake". If more people would abandon your cynical defeatist attitude that encourages labeling literally everything as fake news and actually judged individual stories based on their own merit, political discourse in the USA would be a lot more productive.