Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 81:
Line 81: +
→Proposed new article structure
::Let me associate myself with the gentleman's comments above. And I would further add there is no way for Donald Trump or CNN to ever walk back his [https://youtu.be/1IDF-8khS3w calling CNN fske news at a press conference]. JDano's premise follows Hillary Clinton and the New York Times excuse for her loss. Fake news has been around for ever. According to polls, people under 35 hold [[Jon Stewart]] and the ''Daily Show'' in as high esteem as our parents held [[Walter Cronkite]] (only Stewart is funnier. btw, did you know, CBS's Moscow bureau chief, [[Bernard Redmont]], whom Cronkite introduced nitely while Americans were being killed at a rate of 100 per wk for ten solid years fighting the spread of Soviet communism, was a KGB agent? If that is not 'fake news,' what is?) [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 13:11, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
::Let me associate myself with the gentleman's comments above. And I would further add there is no way for Donald Trump or CNN to ever walk back his [https://youtu.be/1IDF-8khS3w calling CNN fske news at a press conference]. JDano's premise follows Hillary Clinton and the New York Times excuse for her loss. Fake news has been around for ever. According to polls, people under 35 hold [[Jon Stewart]] and the ''Daily Show'' in as high esteem as our parents held [[Walter Cronkite]] (only Stewart is funnier. btw, did you know, CBS's Moscow bureau chief, [[Bernard Redmont]], whom Cronkite introduced nitely while Americans were being killed at a rate of 100 per wk for ten solid years fighting the spread of Soviet communism, was a KGB agent? If that is not 'fake news,' what is?) [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 13:11, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
:::I suggest we stick to the subject rather than moving off into politics. My understanding is that "fake news" was in widespread use before the 2016 election and referred to news items designed to appealing to the emotion of the reader to the point that the item would be spread without investigating the truth of the underlying item. While some fake new items were designed to appeal to liberals and others to conservatives, these "fake news" authors did not care. "Fake news" was also a problem in other parts of the world and was a way to drive up ISIS recruitment. We need to explain that problem and possible solutions at a high school reading level without assuming that the reader knows a lot about it. The purpose of Conservapedia is to write articles like that, not to re-argue the latest headlines. There is so many bad examples in the current article that the meaning of "fake news" is lost in a blur. Perhaps another editor can suggest a positive path forward. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 16:24, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
:::I suggest we stick to the subject rather than moving off into politics. My understanding is that "fake news" was in widespread use before the 2016 election and referred to news items designed to appealing to the emotion of the reader to the point that the item would be spread without investigating the truth of the underlying item. While some fake new items were designed to appeal to liberals and others to conservatives, these "fake news" authors did not care. "Fake news" was also a problem in other parts of the world and was a way to drive up ISIS recruitment. We need to explain that problem and possible solutions at a high school reading level without assuming that the reader knows a lot about it. The purpose of Conservapedia is to write articles like that, not to re-argue the latest headlines. There is so many bad examples in the current article that the meaning of "fake news" is lost in a blur. Perhaps another editor can suggest a positive path forward. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 16:24, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
::::Sticking to the subject ''does'' mean entering the realm of politics. Once again, we have two different definitions of fake news. "My" definition does not exclude "yours"; it is broader than "yours". I think almost everyone thinks of "my" definition, and in order for this article to be relevant and useful and speak out against the leftist elite, we need to follow "my" definition. You can create subsections for your types of fake news (seriously, that would be helpful -- in the "examples" section, make subheaders of ISIS-related fake news and other types). But we must not pretend that news stories reported in the media that are false or misleading are not fake news. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:30, 7 April 2017 (EDT)