In Rare Moment Of Honesty Trump Defines "Fake News"

Trump was back on Twitter yesterday, and as usual, he was attacking the press. He accused the press of being corrupt and producing "fake news". And in a scary moment suggested that he might refuse credentials to press outlets that didn't please him. That would be a direct attack on not just the press, but our democratic system of government.

But perhaps the most interesting part of his silly tweet was in its second line. In that line, he had a rare (and undoubtably accidental) moment of honesty -- and gave us his definition of "fake news". It turns out that for him, any story that contains negative information about him is "fake news".

It has nothing to do with whether the story is true or not. Truth doesn't matter at all. The only thing that matters is whether the story is negative or positive about him. It shows he truly is a narcissist. If a story contains negative information about Trump, then it is "fake news". If the story is positive about Trump, then it is real news according to him.

Most of us already knew this, but it's nice to see Trump admit it -- even if it was an accident.

New Study Shows "Fake News" Tipped Election To Trump

(Cartoon image is by David Horsey in the Los Angeles Times.)

Donald Trump has been loathe to admit that Russian interference had any effect on the 2016 presidential election. He is afraid that a close look at the Russian meddling in that election will show that their actions did help him to win (whether he colluded with them to accomplish that or not) -- and that would make him look undeserving of the office (since he got it with foreign help).

It turns out that his fears are well-grounded. While there's still no evidence that the Russian hacking was able to alter any votes, a new study shows that Russian trolls were effective in planting "fake news" on social media which depressed the vote for Clinton (maybe as much as 4% overall) -- and that was enough to deny her an electoral college victory.

Most of these fake stories were planted on social media by Russian "trolls". They were then picked up and redistributed widely by both Trump supporters on the right and Sanders supporters on the left. Most of those passing on the fake stories probably thought they were true, and were just trying to help their own candidate -- but that doesn't excuse their being duped by Russian trolls.

The new study was done by Richard Gunther, Paul A. Beck, and Erik C. Nesbit at Ohio State University. The whole study is well worth reading, but I provide just a tiny part of it below.

Dan Rather Responds To Sinclair Broadcasting Propaganda

(The local affiliates above are all owned by Sinclair Broadcasting.)

Right-wing (and Trump-loving) Sinclair Broadcasting has recently forced the news people at the stations they own read a corporate-approved message to their viewers. Here is journalist Dan Rather response to Sinclair's atrocious action.

Let's be clear, news anchors looking into camera and reading a script handed down by a corporate overlord, a script meant to obscure the truth not elucidate it, isn't journalism. It's propaganda. It's Orwellian. And it is on a slippery slope towards some of history's most destructive forces. These are the means by which despots wrest power, silence dissent, and oppress the masses. 

To those who say this rhetoric is hyperbolic, I submit that attacking the press as honest brokers of information has been one of the constants of this Administration and all those who normalize it. But this is not normal. This is not how the freedoms enshrined in our Constitution, that beloved First Amendment, is supposed to operate. 

Many of you by now have seen the video mashup of news employees on Sinclair-owned TV stations delivering the same talking points to their viewers. For those who haven't, I have included the link below. And a big tip of the Stetson to Timothy Burke, the video director at Deadspin, who edited the string of video clips into a powerful sequence that puts the dangers of our time into visceral relief. 

The faces of the men and women you see delivering this chilling message are befitting those of a hostage video. Maybe some of these local anchors took to it with gusto, but I believe that number is few. That's not why people are drawn to journalism. And maybe you will say that they should have refused or even resigned in protest, but I know that one can grasp in desperation for rationalizations and compromise when one feels their livelihood is at risk. That is the bet that Sinclair and its allies in media and government are betting on - that they can chip away, with small strikes of the chisel, at the bedrock of American democracy. I suspect that the vast majority of the journalists you see in this video want to be in an environment where they can do their jobs, reporting the news fairly, without favor or bias. They need our support. 

That is why it is incumbent for Americans of all political persuasions to say this is intolerable. Congress should hold hearings and call the executives of Sinclair to account, but one suspects that is highly unlikely in the current political environment. Will this spur citizens to elect representatives who recognize that this is a clear and present danger? Will enough people be outraged to bombard stations, and advertisors, with letters, phone calls, and tweets to suggest this is unacceptable? 

For now, Sinclair is trying to explain away the controversy, and they have a powerful ally in the President. But as we saw with the advertisers bailing en masse from Laura Ingraham's Fox News show after she attacked a Parkland High School student activist in a Tweet, the voice of the people still matters. If enough people speak, they cannot be ignored.

A free and independent press must be part of #WhatUnitesUs

Here is the link to the video.

77% Says Major TV & Newspapers Report Fake News

I found this survey shocking. It is a recent survey from the Monmouth University Poll -- done between March 2nd and 5th of a random national sample of 803 adults, with a margin of error of 3.5 points.

It shows that 77% of the public says our major media outlets (TV and newspapers) report fake news -- with 31% saying they do it regularly and 46% saying they do it occasionally. Only 21% said they do not report fake news.

This was not just Trump's followers saying this. It included 61% of Democrats, 82% of Independents, and 89% of Republicans. In other words, a majority of all three political persuasions believe this.

That's very troubling, because a democracy depends on a free press giving them the information to make decisions. Can a democracy even survive if the people don't trust the press?

The only partially saving grace in this mess is shown in the chart below. It turns out that most people have a very loose definition of what constitutes fake news. Only a tiny minority of 25% say fake news is when the media reports facts that are not correct (including 33% of Democrats, 26% of Independents, and 15% of Republicans).

But a much larger group of 65% say fake news is not just reporting incorrect facts, but also includes the editorial decisions made on what news to report (even if the facts are correct in that reporting). And that includes 58% of Democrats, 64% of Independents, and 75% of Republicans. That means that these people consider news that they disagree with to be fake news -- even if the reporting is accurate.

It shows just how partisan the divide is in this country right now. People only want to hear the news that they agree with -- and that seems to include those on both the left and the right.

I have to disagree with these people. Fake news is reporting things that are not true. Stories that are factually correct that you happen to disagree with are NOT fake news. Like it or not, media has the right to choose what stories they will report and what stories they will not report, as long as those stories are all factually correct.

I personally don't like Fox News, because they choose to report only stories that make the right look good. They have the right to do that, and while I may think it's basically propaganda, it is not fake news as long as what is reported is true. And the same can be said of the media that leans to the left.

If you don't like the editorial policy of a newspaper or TV channel, then don't read or watch that media outlet. Find some you are more comfortable with. They don't have an obligation to report only the news you like. Their obligation is only to report the truth.

Trump's "Fake News" Technique Is Being Copied Worldwide

(Cartoon image is by Pat Byrnes in The New Yorker.)

The following article at Axios was written by Mike Allen, Sara Fischer, and Jim Vandehei:

Donald Trump in one year has done more to discredit and diminish truth, facts and media than any other figure in our lifetime. 

You might love his middle finger to the media. But even the strongest of Trump backers should think long and hard about a world without facts and common truths.

His techniques — especially claiming bad or unwanted news is "fake news" — are getting copied worldwide, just as evil actors like Russia are getting better at spreading misinformation. Here's a snapshot:

• Despots use fake news as a weapon: Leaders or state media in at least 15 countries have used the term "fake news" to try to quell dissent or defuse questions about human rights violations.
• In the U.S.: Within seconds of any major attack or shooting, fake news (real fake news: news that is actually false) starts circulating about the suspect and victims, forcing tech platforms to apologize for surfacing news from faulty sources — think Vegas shooting, Times Square subway bombing, etc.
• Elsewhere in the West: In Spain, Russian state-backed news organizations and bots "promoted digital misinformation and outright fake news" about the politically charged vote in Catalonia, according to the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab. That's in addition to fake news campaigns to meddle with elections this year in the U.S., U.K., France and Germany.
• In the East: In India, the Washington Post reported, false information spread through Facebook-owned WhatsApp has become "a part of everyday life," leading to violence, as well as religious and caste tensions. Similar fake news problems are happening on WhatsApp in Myanmar.
• Fake news via messaging (especially Facebook-owned Messenger) has become a major global problem. More people use messaging apps globally than social media apps, and Facebook has hardly addressed the messaging fake news epidemic.
• It's gotten so bad that fake news will be the Pope's theme for his annual World Communications Day, coming in May.
• Regulators around the world are beginning to take the problem seriously. Communications enforcers in the U.S., U.K., South Africa and elsewhere are all looking at ways to crack down on the problem, without inhibiting free speech.
• Regimes like those in China and Russia turn to censorship, with government-run media spewing propaganda — another form of actual fake news.

Be smart: We can't say it too often: The real problem with fake news is that people don't believe real news. That's terrible for society and democracy, making good decisions less likely.

Who Would Win An Award Given For "Fake News Network" ?

Donald Trump recently said there should be an award given for "Fake News Network". He meant it as a slam to CNN, who he has relentlessly attacked for reporting the truth about him. The Rasmussen Poll took Trump's suggestion, and polled 1,000 likely voters nationwide on November 28th and 29th (with 3 point margin of error). They asked respondents who would win the award for "Fake News Network".

Trump would be disappointed in the results, because a plurality of Americans (40%) chose Fox News (Trump's favorite network) as the winner, while only 25% chose CNN. Americans know that Fox is not really a news network, but a propaganda arm of the Republican Party.

Trumpistas Have An Amazing Ability To Deny Reality

It is beyond doubt that Russia invented fake news stories to help Donald Trump win the election. Social media sites have all admitted they were used in this way -- and are currently being grilled by Congress about it. In addition, Congress applied new sanctions against Russia for this behavior.

But if there's anything Trump voters are good at -- it's denying reality (no matter how much evidence is revealed). About 78% of Trump voters don't believe the Russians created and spread fake stories to help Trump (38% say it definitely didn't happen and 40% say it probably didn't happen). Only a tiny 22% say it probably (20%) or definitely (2%) happened.

This chart shows results from a new Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between October 29th and 31st of a random national sample of 1,500 adults (including 497 Trump voters), with a 3 point margin of error.

Real News: Bigger Problem Than Fake News In Election

(Cartoon image is by Gary Varvel in the Indianapolis Star.)

I do think "Fake" news has become a problem, and may have affected the 2016 election, but the real news (which is supposed to be trusted) was a significantly bigger problem. Here is some of how Matthew Yglesias puts it at Vox.com:

While it’s true that fake news appears to have circulated widely in Trump-friendly corners of the internet — possibly with some assistance from the Russian government — the idea that fake news was central to the outcome of the campaign has little basis in fact. The very nature of viral fake news is that it’s mostly likely to be shared by people who have already bought into a partisan or ideological worldview, with pro-Trump fake news largely shared by Trump supporters to other Trump supporters. 

Clinton’s campaign did have a real news problem, but the problem was with the real news coverage — coverage that dwelled overwhelmingly on a bullshit email server scandal, devoted far fewer resources to investigating Trump’s shady foundation than Clinton’s lifesaving one, largely ignored Trump’s financial conflicts of interest, and almost entirely avoided discussion of the policy stakes in the campaign. 

Trump ended the campaign as he began it — unpopular and viewed as unqualified by a majority of voters, with no amount of fake news stories to puff him up succeeding in moving the needle. But Clinton, who began the 2016 cycle with reasonably high favorable numbers, saw them crater under a torrent of email stories with 45 percent of voters telling exit pollsters they were bothered “a lot” by her decision to forgo a state.gov email address, of which 86 percent voted for Trump. 

Whether journalists want to be proud or ashamed of the work done by mainstream press during the campaign is up to them, but it was perfectly normal stories in normal outlets that moved the needle in a major way — fake news was a total sideshow. . . .

While the Trump campaign was great for the fake news industry, the implication that fake news was critical to Trump’s electoral victory seems unsupported. The election was close enough that everything mattered, so it’s certainly possible that white Catholics who were duped into believing that Pope Francis had endorsed Trump swung three crucial swing states. 

But it also seems clear that the impact of fake news, whatever it may have been, was minor compared with the impact — for good or for ill — of the traditional news media.

A team of researchers working for Gallup found that what Americans heard about Clinton during the campaign was overwhelmingly information related to emails. By contrast, they found, “Americans' reports of what they have read, seen or heard about Donald Trump over this same period have been more varied and related to his campaign activities and statements.”

The stories about Clinton’s email server, the separate spate of stories about Clinton Foundation emails revealed through Freedom of Information Act requests, and the third spate of stories about emails stolen from John Podesta’s email account were not fake news. 

They were very real stories that totally normal mainstream media organizations chose to make the focal point of their coverage of the 2016 campaign. This coverage, though extremely extensive, did an extraordinarily poor job of explaining the actual legal issue at stake in the server matter. Network television newscasts from ABC, NBC, and CBS chose to devote three times as much airtime to Clinton’s email server as they gave to all policy issues combined. The Associated Press ran a major investigative story into Clinton Foundation influence peddling that treated a meeting with a Nobel Peace Prize winner as evidence of an insidious pay-to-play scheme. The New York Times did a Clinton Foundation investigation that treated Bill Clinton successfully rescuing American hostages from North Korea as scandalous. The fact that public health experts believe the Clinton Foundation saved millions of lives, by contrast, played extremely little role in 2016 campaign coverage. . . .

The sum total of this media coverage — real stories based on editorial decisions about how to weight and present real facts — was to give the public the impression that two similarly ethically flawed candidates were running against each other in an election with low policy stakes. The reporters and editors responsible for that coverage can reasonably (if a bit absurdly) consider themselves proud of the work that led the public to that conclusion, or they can consider themselves ashamed of it. But the idea that voters were moved by fake stories about the pope rather than all-too-real ones about email servers is a preposterous evasion. 

Most Who Saw The Fake News Stories Believed Them

1. Pope Francis Shocks World, Endorses Donald Trump for President, Releases Statement (Fake)

2. Donald Trump Sent His Own Plane to Transport 200 Stranded Marines (Fake)

3. FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email Leaks Found Dead in Apparent Murder-Suicide (Fake)

4. Donald Trump Protester Speaks Out: “I Was Paid $3,500 to Protest Trump’s Rally” (Fake)

5. FBI Director Comey Just Put a Trump Sign on His Front Lawn (Fake)

-------------------------------------------------------------

6. Melania Trump’s Girl-on-Girl Photos From Racy Shoot Revealed (True)

7. Barbara Bush: “I Don’t Know How Women Can Vote” for Trump (True)

8. Donald Trump Says He’d “Absolutely” Require Muslims to Register (True)

9. Trump: “I Will Protect Our LGBTQ Citizens” (True)

10. I Ran the CIA. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton (True)

11. Donald Trump on Refusing Presidential Salary: “I’m Not Taking It” (True)

I wrote the other day about how dangerous fake news stories can be, because there are people who will believe them (and some who will act on them). But it looks like they may be even worse than I thought. That's because it seems that a lot of people, maybe even most people, simply cannot distinguish between a true story or one that is false.

Buzzfeed commissioned the Ipsos Poll to find out if people believed the fake news stories. Between November 28th and December 1st they questioned about 3,015 adults. They showed them 11 news stories at random -- asking them if they had seen the stories. Those who said they had seen the stories were then asked if the story was accurate or not (i.e., true or false).

The stories they used are listed above. The first five listed are false (fake news stories). The second six are true. As the chart above shows, most people were just as likely to believe the fake news stories as the real news stories.

To me, this proves two things:

1. Most people are either lazy or idiots -- and will believe nearly anything they read on social media without checking to see whether it is true or not.

2. Fake news stories are dangerous -- not only because some nut could use them as an excuse to hurt or kill people, but also because they could affect our elections and whether our officials are believed when trying to do their job honestly.

Fake News Is Not A Joke - It Is Dangerous

The picture above (by Sarah L Voisin/Washington Post) shows the police response to a report of a shooter in a restaurant in Washington, D.C. Police said 28 year old Edgar Maddison Welch had traveled fro North Carolina to the Comet Ping Pong Restaurant in Washington to "investigate" the business and expose the nefarious things that were happening there. He entered the restaurant and fired several shots into the ceiling, forcing patrons and employees to flee.

Why would he do such an insane thing? Because of fake news stories posted on social media site shortly before the election. Here's how The Washington Post describes it:

The restaurant’s owner and employees were threatened on social media in the days before the election after fake news stories circulated claiming that then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and her campaign chief were running a child sex ring from the restaurant’s backrooms. Even Michael Flynn, a retired general whom President-elect Donald Trump has tapped to advise him on national security, shared stories about another anti-Clinton conspiracy theory involving pedophilia. None of them were true. But the fake stories and threats persisted, some even aimed at children of Comet Ping Pong employees and patrons. The restaurant’s owner was forced to contact the FBI, local police, Facebook and other social-media platforms in an effort to remove the articles. . . .

But it didn’t stop the harassment, and nearby businesses have received threats as well, according to police. On Sunday, Washington Post reporters involved in this article were the target of online threats shortly after it posted.

It's a miracle that no one was physically harmed, but financial and psychological damage was done to businesses in the area and their employees (and some customers as well) -- and all because some people thought it was humorous (or an aid to Donald Trump) to post fake news stories on the internet.

There is no excuse for the posting of fake news stories. We have long known, that out of our huge population, there are hundreds (if not thousands) of people that will believe nearly anything (especially if it coincides with what they want to believe, or is about some person or groups that they don't like). And there are too many of them who are willing to grab a weapon and act on that fake news by killing innocent people. And it doesn't seem to make any difference how crazy the story is -- there will be some who believe it and are willing to kill because of it.

Fake news stories are not harmless or funny -- or acceptable as a campaign tool. They are dangerous, and they must be stopped.