'Fake news' inquiry launched

[Vimana.]

Actually it's the truth according to Donald Trump. He worked out a long time ago that the MSM like to twist everything, push vague truths, and regularly omit things. That's why he uses Twitter and Facebook to communicate directly with the electorate.

You can actually trace the origins of this fake news story back to a tweet that was made in early November, after people had started to notice strange things being mentioned in the leaked Podesta emails https://mobile.twitter.com/jmpalmier...64366547533824 In order to suppress discussion surrounding these leaked emails, we had the Russian hacking story, and the attack on the alternative media.

The tables have now been turned with Trump's unexpected election victory, so we will have to wait and see what happens next, but I don't think we have heard the last of this.

How do you determine that 'trump's tweets are any more or less distorted than MSM news?
" Alternative facts" from both sides seems more likely.

[Wales-Bales]

How do you determine that 'trump's tweets are any more or less distorted than MSM news?
" Alternative facts" from both sides seems more likely.

If I want to tell you something important, it will be more accurate if I tell you directly rather than going through a 3rd party, especially one who is opposed to me. Then you can judge my words knowing that they came directly from me, and they haven't been altered in any way.

[lardy]

If I want to tell you something important, it will be more accurate if I tell you directly rather than going through a 3rd party, especially one who is opposed to me. Then you can judge my words knowing that they came directly from me, and they haven't been altered in any way.

POTUS statements, etc could always be easily found. How many cameras are there at a press conference?

[Wales-Bales]

POTUS statements, etc could always be easily found. How many cameras are there at a press conference?

Thing is nobody looks into the stuff that they hear on the news!

[lardy]

Thing is nobody looks into the stuff that they hear on the news!

Doesn't this contradict what you said in the Daily Mail/Wikipedia discussion - that people should decide for themselves?

[Wales-Bales]

Doesn't this contradict what you said in the Daily Mail/Wikipedia discussion - that people should decide for themselves?

Not at all. In an ideal world, people would get there information from a variety of sources, and then come to their own conclusions. However the fact is most people get their information from a single source, usually the TV or MSM. And it is obvious what the Daily Mail/Wikipedia thing is all about - the suppression of opposing views.

[lardy]

Not at all. In an ideal world, people would get there information from a variety of sources, and then come to their own conclusions. However the fact is most people get their information from a single source, usually the TV or MSM. And it is obvious what the Daily Mail/Wikipedia thing is all about - the suppression of opposing views.

If it is about the suppression of opposing views, why don't they ban more 'news' outlets with the same view as the Mail?

[Vimana.]

If I want to tell you something important, it will be more accurate if I tell you directly rather than going through a 3rd party, especially one who is opposed to me. Then you can judge my words knowing that they came directly from me, and they haven't been altered in any way.

Well, I get that ;)

But what if you are lying, or it became abundantly clear that previously you had lied in a direct communique?
Now what do I believe?!

Does an untruth/distortion from the horses mouth (in order to convey a particular viewpoint) have any more merit than an untruth/distortion processed through a media outlet (in order to convey a particular viewpoint)?

Perhaps the media outlet has to take a little more care to avoid litigation even.
The horses mouth might be able to say whatever it wants - on behalf of itself.

I'm sure that the use of Social Media its a fascinating about turn in the world of politics - even if some of the early adopters often sound like petulant brats rather than statespersons - but I also suspect that 'trump' trumping off directly via Twitter is not exactly the the way, the truth and the light.

Multiple flavours of bullsh1t - direct and indirect?
(yeah i know .. there's a bigger picture behind it all ;) )

[Wales-Bales]

Well, I get that ;)

But what if you are lying, or it became abundantly clear that previously you had lied in a direct communique?
Now what do I believe?!

Does an untruth/distortion from the horses mouth (in order to convey a particular viewpoint) have any more merit than an untruth/distortion processed through a media outlet (in order to convey a particular viewpoint)?

Perhaps the media outlet has to take a little more care to avoid litigation even.
The horses mouth might be able to say whatever it wants - on behalf of itself.

I'm sure that the use of Social Media its a fascinating about turn in the world of politics - even if some of the early adopters often sound like petulant brats rather than statespersons - but I also suspect that 'trump' trumping off directly via Twitter is not exactly the the way, the truth and the light.

Multiple flavours of bullsh1t - direct and indirect?
(yeah i know .. there's a bigger picture behind it all ;) )

It just makes your job as the receiver of my message a little easier, knowing that the words have not been distorted in any way. Naturally you will still have some work to do regarding the veracity of my message and what it is I am saying Propaganda is an interesting topic!

[Mrs Steve R]

It just makes your job as the receiver of my message a little easier, knowing that the words have not been distorted in any way. Naturally you will still have some work to do regarding the veracity of my message and what it is I am saying Propaganda is an interesting topic!

[the other bob wilson]

If I want to tell you something important, it will be more accurate if I tell you directly rather than going through a 3rd party, especially one who is opposed to me. Then you can judge my words knowing that they came directly from me, and they haven't been altered in any way.

Just wondering what you make of these two links - I thought Obama's ratings were bad enough, but then I saw Trump's!

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

[Wales-Bales]

Just wondering what you make of these two links - I thought Obama's ratings were bad enough, but then I saw Trump's!

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

I think Trump is a bit of a chancer, but he is also a genius! He's got the democrat supporters in perpetual meltdown mode, which is fun to see. The main benefit of Trump being president is it should make our Brexit a little bit easier. It will also be interesting to see whether he sorts out the current corrupt political system or goes along with it. I still think he was the least worst option, even though he will probably come up with some very dodgy policies!