Correct it should stop, fake news always wastes the public time, this is the only publicity stunts for getting attention.
Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
211–220 of 468 posts
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#212NYT hired a person that is openly racist and tried to turn long form story about a Chinese woman in tech into family drama clickbait that risked making that woman get killed by the government.
NYT can whine all they want, but until they stop producing fake news themselves no reason to pay... If all papers produce such low quality biased content, I prefer the free ones, at least there is more honesty there about what I am getting for what I pay for.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#213A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…
> Bias: every single one of them have bias. The burden is on me to spot bias and think objectively. Why do I have to pay do that? At least present news as it is?
This has always been and will always be the case. There is no possibility for objectivity; unless they compile every fact about the universe and present them all to you (quite a dull read), there’s inherently an editing process and selection of facts the writer thinks is important. You will, and should, always have to think for yourself. Even if news were presented in as dry a fashion as possible, you’d still have to think (or what’s the point?). And the facts will always be incomplete.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#214A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…
I moved from NYT to Economist for all of these reasons.
NYT went berserk after the 2016 elections if you ask me. Now every article feels like an opinion piece.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#215The news as a written medium is losing traction: youtube rules the next generation (anecdotally from what I see with my daughter & friends). I wouldn't mind paying youtube premium channel if I can get a truly centrist opinion pieces, factual reporting and random excerpts into topics like science/philosophy/comedy/culture. Sadly afaic again, most of the 'online' content is way too left (or the worse option: way too ri…
Tim Pool.
He's got both a news channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/Timcasts/videos) and an Op-Ed channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe02lGcO-ahAURWuxAJnjdA).
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
The WSJ pleasantly keeps its editorial content on the editorial pages. The NYT thinks all pages are editorial pages. Note this is different from choosing what to print. Both papers do that.
A very long time ago, I used to enjoy reading The Times (British newspaper) for exactly that reason. It was a very thin newspaper with 1 page of editorials and virtually no fluff sections (like leisure, travel,etc). Just news. I haven't seen the print paper in a very long time, but I go to their website and see the following headlines: Sunday Times journalist was murdered by Assad, Bitter split on assisted dying hits…
Lots of the media seem to have lost their marbles over Twitter etc. eroding their hegemony.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#217I do pay for news, however one request I have for news providers is a greater emphasis on presenting news from all sides. Over the last 4-5 years most news providers have picked a political side (to a much greater extent than I recall in the past). This is true in both countries for which I follow news (India and the US). Given an event I can predict the coverage that venues will give it. This is troubling to me, and…
Here in Brazil, publications pretend they are publishing the "truth" while they are controlled by a handful of the richest families of the country. I'd like that they at least recognized their bias. They won't get a cent from my pocket.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#218I do pay for news, however one request I have for news providers is a greater emphasis on presenting news from all sides. Over the last 4-5 years most news providers have picked a political side (to a much greater extent than I recall in the past). This is true in both countries for which I follow news (India and the US). Given an event I can predict the coverage that venues will give it. This is troubling to me, and…
Completely disagree. I want the facts, backed by people who know the situation. I do not want “fair and balanced.” Not all sides have equal grounding and I’m tired of this false equivalence.
We are seriously in times where one side denies climate change. There is zero point in giving them time because it elevates their point to being equal to the one backed by actual climate scientists, not industry that has a vested interest, like coal, in continuing to deny it.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#219> Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
Obviously NY Times has a stake in this, so no need to go further into that angle.
The problem "regular" media is facing today is increased scrutiny w.r.t. neutrality. They're simply not reporting neutrally.
I'm by no means a Trump-supporter (not even American), but when I consistently see traditional media re-reporting internet rumours as truth every time they have the possibility to add a "Look at how bad Trump and his supporters are"-angle... And then often later shown to be wrong, even traditional media is portrayed as spreading fake news. Because they are!
Need an example? How about this very recent incident with MAGA teens and the intervening Indian? This was worldwide reported by "traditional" media as an anti-Trump story. No checks. No verification.
And it was all fake.
So tell me again. Why should I trust them more than, for instance Info wars? Both sides are clearly partisan.
Re: Want to Stop Fake News? Pay for the Real Thing
#220A few complaints I share with the other people in this thread: - It's not clear that even reputed newspapers like NYTimes/WaPo produce quality content consistently. As someone in tech I can clearly see what they get and what they don't. Extrapolating it - it's not at all clear they understand economics or foreign policy or policy impact or environmental concerns and how to address them ...etc. - Bias: every single on…
> Bias: every single one of them have bias. The burden is on me to spot bias and think objectively. Why do I have to pay do that? At least present news as it is? This has always been and will always be the case. There is no possibility for objectivity; unless they compile every fact about the universe and present them all to you (quite a dull read), there’s inherently an editing process and selection of facts the wri…
[deleted]