this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
148 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43853 readers
655 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (4 children)

"Fake News"

There's been good and bad journalism for as long as there's been journalists

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Yup. Only the different names for it are relatively new. The term β€œFake News” didn’t become popular until The Mango Mussolini was President.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To me the term "Fake News" means "News that is true, but I don't want you to think is true".

That seems to be how it is used by the guy who made the term popular.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Let's get Philosophical...

All of reality is perception, a point of view.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mmmmmmh, true. But it has generally been regarded as something bad. And it is not any more.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It's been condemned regularly for the last few hundred years. This feels like there's a need and desire for it along with a revulsion about it from others

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel that with the advent of social media and the freedom to read same news incident from multiple sources in a matter of minutes, the news sources are forced to pick a side. There's more activism and less journalism.

There used to be 1-2 activist newspapers, but now even the big ones have to choose sides

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For sure, at least in the past journalists would maintain a pretense of impartiality

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No they didn't. There's a famous quote that in the early 20th century newspapers didn't just report the news they made the news. Newspapers have always had "fake news" and they've always taken sides and had agendas

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It got so bad we had a war because of fake news, so we passed some laws to not let it happen again, then Ronald Reagan got those laws removed, and we are back after it.