WILLIAM WEST/AFP/Getty THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.10 Jun 201921 Americans who say fake news is a “very big problem” outnumber those who say the same about “climate change,” according to a new survey by the Pew Research Center.“Many Americans say the creation and spread of made-up news and information is causing significant harm to the nation and needs to be stopped,” the survey, with a full fifty percent of the population describing it as a very big problem as opposed to 46 percent who say the same of climate change.U.S. Adults believe that the majority of the content of made-up news and information falls into two major categories: politics/elections (73 percent) and entertainment/celebrities (61 percent), Pew revealed.A bulk of Americans sense an ideological motivation behind the creation of fake news, with 86 percent of the population saying that “the desire to push an agenda or viewpoint” is a key reason why news is manipulated.As with many issues, when it comes to fake news there are sharp divisions along partisan lines, Pew found. “In general, Republicans, the highly politically aware and older Americans express higher levels of concern about the impact of made-up news than their counterparts,” the report stated.In fact, among Republicans and those who lean Republican, 62 percent believe that fake news is a “very big problem” as opposed to just 40 percent of Democrats or those who lean Democrat who say this. To be more precise you have it right calling it Fake Science which is its own category. It is similar to fake news and sometimes it is both when it applies to misleading science news.
The Muscogee (Creek) Nation is a federally recognized Native American tribe based in the U.S. State of Oklahoma.The nation descends from the historic Creek Confederacy, a large group of indigenous peoples of the Southeastern Woodlands.Official languages include Muscogee, Yuchi, Natchez, Alabama, and Koasati, with Muscogee retaining the largest number of speakers.
Some of it truly is FAKE science especially the way Michael Mann presented it with his hockey stick science. He and a few others like some of the IPCC pronouncements of impending doom, (remember the Himalayan glaciers all melting) have actually had the opposite affect on public acceptance of climate change and we should be thankful for these clowns of science because they do incredible destruction to the CAGW meme long term. Time is the great leveller of scientific truth and understanding, and these people who have peddled in scientific malfeasance will be held accountable in the history books.
Unfortunately it has cost an awful lot of money so far and will probably cost trillions more before it is apparent that the sensitivity of CO2 is not only minimal but probably highly beneficial to life for the long term future of the good Earth. Some years ago, there was an attempt to normalize Fake Science, even here at WUWT by a few, under the name Post Normal Science.which was science tied to a political agenda.
The argument was that the urgency of applying what the Post Normals call the Precautionary Principle required action before all the real science could be done, because doing nothing would lead catastrophe.AOC’s argument in a nutshell.the argument that CAGW is so imminent and sufficiently plausible that the Chicken Little panic is actually the rational course. Not quite “The Sky is Falling!!”, but worse, “The Sky may be falling.so everybody panic!!” Sad. Yet the Progressive Left of the whole world is still trying to push this irrational Rationalism on the rest of us.
Mencken“No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”“The mistake that is made always runs the other way.
Because the plain people are able to speak and understand, and even, in many cases, to read and write, it is assumed that they have ideas in their heads, and an appetite for more. This assumption is a folly.”Mencken may not be correct but he was an astute observer. I’m pretty sure I’ve read that Americans, in general, are less inclined to believe “climate change” is an existential threat — or even much of a concern — than Europeans are.If true, do you suppose this is because Europeans are more used to blindly accepting the dictates of their governments in matters of national importance?It would be totally ironic if the lefties said it was because the US educational system is so bad they can’t understand the science, because hey — the lefties have been running the US educational system for the past four decades, so they’d only have themselves to blame.
There has always been a rebellious streak in Americans. I think that is why public schools work so hard to beat that out of people. It works for the most part – but I think deep down every American is willing to say “fuck you – I won’t do what you tell me”.So when people detect a group playing authoritarian games – it riles the ire of these people.
There must be a reason why authoritarianism is needed to enforce the claim. Where is the proof? Especially in a thing as variable as the weather – in a system that is older than human history.These polls ALWAYS underpredict the heterodox opinion. I would not be surprised if the number of people that have grown skeptical about AGW is above 60%. And there is no real support for any of the Green New Deal garbage. When put to a vote in the house NO ONE voted for it. That’s an interesting question.
Big government breeds public dependence and saps independent thinking. Big government sucks up all the moral oxygen (and the money) in society and chokes out institutions like civic and social clubs, private schools, charities that help the less well off, and even churches (Europe is currently less religious than the US). Europe has many brilliant people, but big government may have made them too trusting of civic authority.That’s why the US needs to try to reign in government before it crushes us, too. I’m pretty sure the development of the consumer economy and its attendant advertising is the main reason for this. Americans have been B.S’d so badly for so long that they inherently refuse to believe until it’s proven.
American politics is an extension. When the sellers got so over the top that people were refusing to accept what they were told was about the same time that the Nazis in Germany figured out that the big lie and pervasive lies could have the desired effect even when people were tuned out.Advertising and political lies now works that way. Like a steady drip of water. The schools have the advantage of fresh and innocent minds. We need to reform education from K to Uni to chase the politics out of it. For sure.The results you get from a poll depend on how you ask the questions.There is an ongoing Gallup poll:What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?Note that it’s an open ended question. People can say anything they want.
The trick is to fit their replies into some kind of neat categories. Fake news or anything that looks like fake news doesn’t seem to be a problem.
The reason the Pew poll makes it look like a problem is that they prompted people in such a way as to produce that result. Part of the problem in polling is definitions of fake news.
Post Normal ‘progressives’ seem to believe that means justify the “correct” ends, so outcomes are more important than truth. A Big Lie to turn people toward the ‘right’ reaction or action is not fake news. Similarly if it feels right in supporting your world view, it is not fake news. Republicans seem to be more insistent that the news be true.A better way to analyze the results is to believe that most of the news is fake, 38% of Repubs and 60% of Dems approve of fake news. Agreeing that there is a problem is the first step to solving it. The real issue will be getting people to agree on what IS fake news.
Here we probably have a 50:50 divide. Like climate porn. Half the people know it is fake, but half of them believe it implicitly and run political campaigns based on it.But at least I am heartened that most people recognize that there is Fake News and we need to do something about it, but something that does not inhibit our right to free speech either. This is the really tough issue to address. My concern about any attempt to regulate fake news is exactly your point – who decides what is fake?
The British Government recently talked about setting up an agency to identify and eliminate fake news – a chilling prospect as it is effectively censorship.Marketers have been using fake news since time began, with no widespread ill effects. If lying or deceiving, they are caught out sooner or later.Then there is ‘spin’ – the selection of facts to include in a piece, and the emotional context created by the use of certain adverbs, adjectives and imagery.This is self-regulating in an open, free society, as such statements – again eventually – can be brought down by being challenged. So in my view we need to concentrate on freedom of expression and promote the value of reasoned argument, rather than creating ‘safe spaces’ and banning those who may offend or disagree withn us. Canada’s largest newspaper, the Toronto Star, published a story about physical dangers of climate change that was factually incorrect by 700% to 4500%. The poll respondents were supplied with a short list of 11 issues to respond to in this poll. The% responding that each item “WAS A VERY BIG PROBLEM” was then tallied.That’s not a worthless endeavor. But is easy to make misleading conclusions from these types of questionnaires.When poll respondents are asked to SUPPLY a “list of the most serious concerns” in a poll, respondents rarely include Climate Change.
Or, if the list is at least 12 items long (and respondents are asked to rank the items according to severity) it always falls near the bottom of the list.You will only get a 40+% response to a belief in a Climate Crisis when respondents are asked, “Yes or no, do you feel that Climate Change is a problem?”According to the Alarmunists, the coming Climate Crisis is as ominous as a world wide extinction threatening plague. I don’t see the general population behaving like there is any threat at alllet alone something along the lines of a “Climate Extinction” event.
The level of honesty is clearly lacking on organizational bias and the reward systems for them respectively. Take for example sell-side stock analysts being presented as unbiased to casual readers that don’t know that bias. The same goes for media outlets with a liberal editorial bias writing headlines and writing editorials and deciding the slants in the body of the news.
The sell-side analyst is rewarded for picking downturns in stocks while also influencing the timing and degree of actual decline as best they can influence it. The biased news outlet is selling agenda space without telling the casual readers and they might be forced to sell more of that agenda attention if regular ad revenue declines along with subscribers. The fakest Fake News is climate alarm, which will only become an actual concern when the planet starts cooling, but still not for the reason the alarmists will be saying. They will just switch back to saying that it is people who are causing the cooling and we need to stop burning fossil fuels immediately, the same as they said in the 1970s.The late self-admitted faker-in-chief Stephen Schneider led both the “oil burning is freezing the planet” movement, and immediately after that the “oil burning is burning up the planet” movement. His perfidy still lives on in the funding structure he helped Al Gore put in place where no money goes to anyone who fails to support the radical left’s anti-fossil-fuels agenda.The three Stanford Malthusians–Schneider, Holdren and Ehrlich–may be the three most damaging intellectual frauds in human history.
Malthus was an ECONOMIST whose theory that population growth must create poverty has been contradicted by every era of human existence and was understood by Malthus himself to be a failed theory, though he didn’t know why. He failed to understand that human ingenuity is itself a resource, so that population growth in-effect creates more resources than it consumes (a phenomenon that was not fully understood until Julian Simon sussed out the actual numbers in his great book The Ultimate Resource).The three Stanford Stooges were not doing physical science at all. They were doing economics, fabulously wrong and completely failed economics. Their supposed “science” was all fabricated to tell a tale that supported their economic errors, as Schneider admitted: “Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”He advocated for making whatever scientific claims would garner public support for what he saw as necessary policy actions, but his convictions about policy were not based on science at all. They were based on his completely incompetent economic views, thinking that human population and economic growth were gobbling up the planet, making it necessary to unplug the economy by unplugging fossil energy supplies, oh and by the way being anti-nuclear too.None of these three morons was EVER doing science.
Total fake science news, and Schneider institutionalized it by creating the climate funding system that is still in place today (administered in Obama’s second term by Holdren). At least $125b now and not a penny ever goes to anyone who fails to support the Malthusian agenda: anti-CO2, anti-energy, anti-economic growth, anti-population. 100% political funding of 100% fake news.The thousands of scientists who go along also accept the Malthusian doctrine. “If we are wrong about CO2 it’s okay because the policies we advocate, reigning in economic growth, will save the planet from being gobbled up by humanity.” So they happily take the money and think of themselves as do-gooders, without concern about whether their scientific claims are valid or not.It is wrong to call these people “neo-Malthusians,” as is commonly heard. They are actually paleo-Malthusian. Compared to them Malthus was a neo-Malthusian. He came to understand that he had been very wrong, but today’s Malthusians are completely unreflective.
They don’t even admit that their man-vs-nature eco-religious beliefs are actually simple old-timey Malthusian economic ideas and they have no awareness of how completely backwards those ideas are now understood to be by people who actually do economics.The whole “climate science” field is actually doing economics, not science. Just really really bad economics, dressed up with fake science rationales on the excuse that the resulting anti-human policy prescriptions are just what the world needs anyway, so don’t fret whether the science is valid or not.
Years ago papers like the New York Times disgracefully perverted the truth by either distortions or simply ignoring what should have been front page news – not hearsay or opinion but brutal acts by those they were siding with politically. I remember two horrific incidents that happened in 1977 and 1978. They involved family and friends of someone I knew and respected. The NYT ignored the first and distorted the second to fit their narrative.
Now what the NYT was doing has become pervasive in the mainstream media.Actually the term “fake news” is misleading. It is often a blend of truths, half-truths and lies. It includes far more than just fake or made up stories. It easily misleads naive and uninformed people. There are a few important warning lights:if a report speaks of “unnamed sources,” do not believe it;if it does not refer the reader to a source for the complete text or address where you can check the actual words and their context, do not believe it;if the article is filled with sensational language and emotive words, do not believe it.if there are serious flaws in the reasoning (logic), do not believe it. Not much fake news. The problem is they spike most of the important stories.Windows 10 “news” is true entertainment about the British Royal Family, dogs, Congress, Trump, the weather.Things that matter are not covered as much.Politics is slanted.
They call you for those polls. They do want to know what you think and what you care about, not because they think you have any wisdom, but so they can craft those idiotic election messages with check marks for what their candidate stands for. They elect who they want. I got to thinking about Brexit (I’m from the UK originally) and it occurred to me that “brexit chaos” is the same as the “climate crisis”. It doesn’t actually exist either in the real world.Sure, there are some electrons doing spasmodic circles in the brains of elitists twits and their toadie media elitist twits, with cash going in their direction but, other than that, Brexit doesn’t actually exist either when it comes to normal, non-parasitic people.Is there a living descendant of Guy Fawkes that could finish the job this time? This isn’t news. For years polls have shown that concern about climate change is pretty low for most Americans.
Of course for high-strung Americans it’s at the very top, right next to a bunch of other imaginary problems like “social justice”, “income inequality”, a “woman’s right to choose”, and “right-wing extremists”. For them everything is a crisis of roughly equal proportion. For laid-back Americans, things like low unemployment, a strong economy, inexpensive energy, law and order, family values and backyard barbeques are high priority. The new “Woke” generation has “woken up” to the understanding that they are being fed an unrelenting stream of marketing – politica,l commercial and ideological, by every mass media outlet that is essentially for hire.Those, however, that call themselves ‘woke’ are in fact mesmerised by the media that tell them:”You are not asleep. You are not dreaming. This is real, wake up and take another dose of progressive propaganda You are not asleep. This is real.
Because we all say so, so it must be true. You are not dreaming”. What Maltha said at that moment in time was correct, and basically it isstill true.
WILLIAM WEST/AFP/Getty THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.10 Jun 201921 Americans who say fake news is a “very big problem” outnumber those who say the same about “climate change,” according to a new survey by the Pew Research Center.“Many Americans say the creation and spread of made-up news and information is causing significant harm to the nation and needs to be stopped,” the survey, with a full fifty percent of the population describing it as a very big problem as opposed to 46 percent who say the same of climate change.U.S. Adults believe that the majority of the content of made-up news and information falls into two major categories: politics/elections (73 percent) and entertainment/celebrities (61 percent), Pew revealed.A bulk of Americans sense an ideological motivation behind the creation of fake news, with 86 percent of the population saying that “the desire to push an agenda or viewpoint” is a key reason why news is manipulated.As with many issues, when it comes to fake news there are sharp divisions along partisan lines, Pew found. “In general, Republicans, the highly politically aware and older Americans express higher levels of concern about the impact of made-up news than their counterparts,” the report stated.In fact, among Republicans and those who lean Republican, 62 percent believe that fake news is a “very big problem” as opposed to just 40 percent of Democrats or those who lean Democrat who say this. To be more precise you have it right calling it Fake Science which is its own category. It is similar to fake news and sometimes it is both when it applies to misleading science news. Some of it truly is FAKE science especially the way Michael Mann presented it with his hockey stick science.
He and a few others like some of the IPCC pronouncements of impending doom, (remember the Himalayan glaciers all melting) have actually had the opposite affect on public acceptance of climate change and we should be thankful for these clowns of science because they do incredible destruction to the CAGW meme long term. Time is the great leveller of scientific truth and understanding, and these people who have peddled in scientific malfeasance will be held accountable in the history books. Unfortunately it has cost an awful lot of money so far and will probably cost trillions more before it is apparent that the sensitivity of CO2 is not only minimal but probably highly beneficial to life for the long term future of the good Earth.
Some years ago, there was an attempt to normalize Fake Science, even here at WUWT by a few, under the name Post Normal Science.which was science tied to a political agenda. The argument was that the urgency of applying what the Post Normals call the Precautionary Principle required action before all the real science could be done, because doing nothing would lead catastrophe.AOC’s argument in a nutshell.the argument that CAGW is so imminent and sufficiently plausible that the Chicken Little panic is actually the rational course. Not quite “The Sky is Falling!!”, but worse, “The Sky may be falling.so everybody panic!!” Sad. Yet the Progressive Left of the whole world is still trying to push this irrational Rationalism on the rest of us.
Mencken“No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”“The mistake that is made always runs the other way.
Because the plain people are able to speak and understand, and even, in many cases, to read and write, it is assumed that they have ideas in their heads, and an appetite for more. This assumption is a folly.”Mencken may not be correct but he was an astute observer. I’m pretty sure I’ve read that Americans, in general, are less inclined to believe “climate change” is an existential threat — or even much of a concern — than Europeans are.If true, do you suppose this is because Europeans are more used to blindly accepting the dictates of their governments in matters of national importance?It would be totally ironic if the lefties said it was because the US educational system is so bad they can’t understand the science, because hey — the lefties have been running the US educational system for the past four decades, so they’d only have themselves to blame. There has always been a rebellious streak in Americans.
I think that is why public schools work so hard to beat that out of people. It works for the most part – but I think deep down every American is willing to say “fuck you – I won’t do what you tell me”.So when people detect a group playing authoritarian games – it riles the ire of these people. There must be a reason why authoritarianism is needed to enforce the claim. Where is the proof? Especially in a thing as variable as the weather – in a system that is older than human history.These polls ALWAYS underpredict the heterodox opinion. I would not be surprised if the number of people that have grown skeptical about AGW is above 60%.
And there is no real support for any of the Green New Deal garbage. When put to a vote in the house NO ONE voted for it. That’s an interesting question.
Big government breeds public dependence and saps independent thinking. Big government sucks up all the moral oxygen (and the money) in society and chokes out institutions like civic and social clubs, private schools, charities that help the less well off, and even churches (Europe is currently less religious than the US).
Europe has many brilliant people, but big government may have made them too trusting of civic authority.That’s why the US needs to try to reign in government before it crushes us, too. I’m pretty sure the development of the consumer economy and its attendant advertising is the main reason for this. Americans have been B.S’d so badly for so long that they inherently refuse to believe until it’s proven. American politics is an extension. When the sellers got so over the top that people were refusing to accept what they were told was about the same time that the Nazis in Germany figured out that the big lie and pervasive lies could have the desired effect even when people were tuned out.Advertising and political lies now works that way.
Like a steady drip of water. The schools have the advantage of fresh and innocent minds. We need to reform education from K to Uni to chase the politics out of it. For sure.The results you get from a poll depend on how you ask the questions.There is an ongoing Gallup poll:What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?Note that it’s an open ended question. People can say anything they want. The trick is to fit their replies into some kind of neat categories. Fake news or anything that looks like fake news doesn’t seem to be a problem.
The reason the Pew poll makes it look like a problem is that they prompted people in such a way as to produce that result. Part of the problem in polling is definitions of fake news. Post Normal ‘progressives’ seem to believe that means justify the “correct” ends, so outcomes are more important than truth. A Big Lie to turn people toward the ‘right’ reaction or action is not fake news. Similarly if it feels right in supporting your world view, it is not fake news. Republicans seem to be more insistent that the news be true.A better way to analyze the results is to believe that most of the news is fake, 38% of Repubs and 60% of Dems approve of fake news.
Agreeing that there is a problem is the first step to solving it. The real issue will be getting people to agree on what IS fake news.
Here we probably have a 50:50 divide. Like climate porn.
Half the people know it is fake, but half of them believe it implicitly and run political campaigns based on it.But at least I am heartened that most people recognize that there is Fake News and we need to do something about it, but something that does not inhibit our right to free speech either. This is the really tough issue to address. My concern about any attempt to regulate fake news is exactly your point – who decides what is fake? The British Government recently talked about setting up an agency to identify and eliminate fake news – a chilling prospect as it is effectively censorship.Marketers have been using fake news since time began, with no widespread ill effects.
If lying or deceiving, they are caught out sooner or later.Then there is ‘spin’ – the selection of facts to include in a piece, and the emotional context created by the use of certain adverbs, adjectives and imagery.This is self-regulating in an open, free society, as such statements – again eventually – can be brought down by being challenged. So in my view we need to concentrate on freedom of expression and promote the value of reasoned argument, rather than creating ‘safe spaces’ and banning those who may offend or disagree withn us. Canada’s largest newspaper, the Toronto Star, published a story about physical dangers of climate change that was factually incorrect by 700% to 4500%. The poll respondents were supplied with a short list of 11 issues to respond to in this poll. The% responding that each item “WAS A VERY BIG PROBLEM” was then tallied.That’s not a worthless endeavor. But is easy to make misleading conclusions from these types of questionnaires.When poll respondents are asked to SUPPLY a “list of the most serious concerns” in a poll, respondents rarely include Climate Change.
Or, if the list is at least 12 items long (and respondents are asked to rank the items according to severity) it always falls near the bottom of the list.You will only get a 40+% response to a belief in a Climate Crisis when respondents are asked, “Yes or no, do you feel that Climate Change is a problem?”According to the Alarmunists, the coming Climate Crisis is as ominous as a world wide extinction threatening plague. I don’t see the general population behaving like there is any threat at alllet alone something along the lines of a “Climate Extinction” event. The level of honesty is clearly lacking on organizational bias and the reward systems for them respectively. Take for example sell-side stock analysts being presented as unbiased to casual readers that don’t know that bias. The same goes for media outlets with a liberal editorial bias writing headlines and writing editorials and deciding the slants in the body of the news. The sell-side analyst is rewarded for picking downturns in stocks while also influencing the timing and degree of actual decline as best they can influence it.
The biased news outlet is selling agenda space without telling the casual readers and they might be forced to sell more of that agenda attention if regular ad revenue declines along with subscribers. The fakest Fake News is climate alarm, which will only become an actual concern when the planet starts cooling, but still not for the reason the alarmists will be saying. They will just switch back to saying that it is people who are causing the cooling and we need to stop burning fossil fuels immediately, the same as they said in the 1970s.The late self-admitted faker-in-chief Stephen Schneider led both the “oil burning is freezing the planet” movement, and immediately after that the “oil burning is burning up the planet” movement. His perfidy still lives on in the funding structure he helped Al Gore put in place where no money goes to anyone who fails to support the radical left’s anti-fossil-fuels agenda.The three Stanford Malthusians–Schneider, Holdren and Ehrlich–may be the three most damaging intellectual frauds in human history. Malthus was an ECONOMIST whose theory that population growth must create poverty has been contradicted by every era of human existence and was understood by Malthus himself to be a failed theory, though he didn’t know why. He failed to understand that human ingenuity is itself a resource, so that population growth in-effect creates more resources than it consumes (a phenomenon that was not fully understood until Julian Simon sussed out the actual numbers in his great book The Ultimate Resource).The three Stanford Stooges were not doing physical science at all. They were doing economics, fabulously wrong and completely failed economics.
Their supposed “science” was all fabricated to tell a tale that supported their economic errors, as Schneider admitted: “Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”He advocated for making whatever scientific claims would garner public support for what he saw as necessary policy actions, but his convictions about policy were not based on science at all. They were based on his completely incompetent economic views, thinking that human population and economic growth were gobbling up the planet, making it necessary to unplug the economy by unplugging fossil energy supplies, oh and by the way being anti-nuclear too.None of these three morons was EVER doing science. Total fake science news, and Schneider institutionalized it by creating the climate funding system that is still in place today (administered in Obama’s second term by Holdren). At least $125b now and not a penny ever goes to anyone who fails to support the Malthusian agenda: anti-CO2, anti-energy, anti-economic growth, anti-population. 100% political funding of 100% fake news.The thousands of scientists who go along also accept the Malthusian doctrine. “If we are wrong about CO2 it’s okay because the policies we advocate, reigning in economic growth, will save the planet from being gobbled up by humanity.” So they happily take the money and think of themselves as do-gooders, without concern about whether their scientific claims are valid or not.It is wrong to call these people “neo-Malthusians,” as is commonly heard.
They are actually paleo-Malthusian. Compared to them Malthus was a neo-Malthusian. He came to understand that he had been very wrong, but today’s Malthusians are completely unreflective. They don’t even admit that their man-vs-nature eco-religious beliefs are actually simple old-timey Malthusian economic ideas and they have no awareness of how completely backwards those ideas are now understood to be by people who actually do economics.The whole “climate science” field is actually doing economics, not science.
Just really really bad economics, dressed up with fake science rationales on the excuse that the resulting anti-human policy prescriptions are just what the world needs anyway, so don’t fret whether the science is valid or not. Years ago papers like the New York Times disgracefully perverted the truth by either distortions or simply ignoring what should have been front page news – not hearsay or opinion but brutal acts by those they were siding with politically. I remember two horrific incidents that happened in 1977 and 1978. They involved family and friends of someone I knew and respected. The NYT ignored the first and distorted the second to fit their narrative.
Now what the NYT was doing has become pervasive in the mainstream media.Actually the term “fake news” is misleading. It is often a blend of truths, half-truths and lies.
It includes far more than just fake or made up stories. It easily misleads naive and uninformed people. There are a few important warning lights:if a report speaks of “unnamed sources,” do not believe it;if it does not refer the reader to a source for the complete text or address where you can check the actual words and their context, do not believe it;if the article is filled with sensational language and emotive words, do not believe it.if there are serious flaws in the reasoning (logic), do not believe it.
Not much fake news. The problem is they spike most of the important stories.Windows 10 “news” is true entertainment about the British Royal Family, dogs, Congress, Trump, the weather.Things that matter are not covered as much.Politics is slanted. They call you for those polls. They do want to know what you think and what you care about, not because they think you have any wisdom, but so they can craft those idiotic election messages with check marks for what their candidate stands for. They elect who they want.
I got to thinking about Brexit (I’m from the UK originally) and it occurred to me that “brexit chaos” is the same as the “climate crisis”. It doesn’t actually exist either in the real world.Sure, there are some electrons doing spasmodic circles in the brains of elitists twits and their toadie media elitist twits, with cash going in their direction but, other than that, Brexit doesn’t actually exist either when it comes to normal, non-parasitic people.Is there a living descendant of Guy Fawkes that could finish the job this time? This isn’t news.
For years polls have shown that concern about climate change is pretty low for most Americans. Of course for high-strung Americans it’s at the very top, right next to a bunch of other imaginary problems like “social justice”, “income inequality”, a “woman’s right to choose”, and “right-wing extremists”. For them everything is a crisis of roughly equal proportion. For laid-back Americans, things like low unemployment, a strong economy, inexpensive energy, law and order, family values and backyard barbeques are high priority. The new “Woke” generation has “woken up” to the understanding that they are being fed an unrelenting stream of marketing – politica,l commercial and ideological, by every mass media outlet that is essentially for hire.Those, however, that call themselves ‘woke’ are in fact mesmerised by the media that tell them:”You are not asleep.
You are not dreaming. This is real, wake up and take another dose of progressive propaganda You are not asleep. This is real.
Because we all say so, so it must be true. You are not dreaming”. What Maltha said at that moment in time was correct, and basically it isstill true.