I just had a brillant idea how to get rid of the "fake news" problem.

[DetlefK]

The Problem:
Fake News used to mean actual unsubstantiated rumors.
Then, the right-wingers co-opted the term and now everything they don't like is described as fake news.

The Solution:
The media and the Democrats should simply brand everything without evidence as fake news.



"Today we got more fake news from Trump-spokesperson Sean Spicer when he denied threatening to kick CNN-reporter Jim Acosta out of future press conferences, when he did in fact say just that 25 minutes earlier."

"In related news, the White House published another piece of possible fake news that Mexico would pay for the border-wall, without offering any evidence to support that."

"During the press conference, Paul Ryan repeatedly proclaimed that the republican alternative to Obamacare would be better, without offering any hard numbers to that. We will keep you updated on this possible issue of fake news."



What do you think how the Trump-administration and the Republicans will react once their own lies get branded as fake news?

Will Kellyannne Conway clutch her pearls how the evil media dares to demand hard evidence for what the White House just said? "Why do you take everything literal? Why don't you just look at what's in Trump's heart?"

Will they claim that their lies CANNOT be "fake news" because they aren't news-organizations?

Will the Republicans do a 180° and bemoan how the term "fake news" is over-used nowadays and why can't people accept that Trump has won and just blindly trust everything he says? (Except when Conway says that we shouldn't take it literal.)

Will the RW-keyboard-warriors lament how the media co-opted the term "fake news" from the RW-keyboard-warriors who co-opted it?

[Buckeye_Democrat]

1. I like it! I'd also like to see them stop interviewing people like Kellyanne.

What's the point? Using up airtime with her deflections? It's not educational, and it's not like she'll ever admit to any wrongdoing by Trump.

[bettyellen]

2. Nope lots of credible investigative journalism can't reveal their sources -

And most people making these claims would not know real evidence if it bit them on the ass

[bucolic_frolic]

3. It will work for awhile

and it's one of the only tools we have at this juncture

But it will drive distrust and therefore paranoia in the public

and make intelligent discourse on facts and reason and logic impossible
if everything is perceived as fake. Apathy might prevail

'nothing is really happening, it's all fake, don't worry about it'

[DetlefK]

4. It would generate a level of discourse of "put up or shut up". I, for one, would welcome that.

[Hortensis]

5. Well, responsible media ARE moving away from allegation-based

news to fact-based news. At least some're trying to. Allegations apparently are far more entertaining, so there's a real profit issue here.

But for now, it's OKAY for the right wing to label honest reporting fake news. Not desirable, but even that desperate attempt at deflection is focusing the spotlight on the reality that

1. We really are being flooded with fake news for evil purpose.
2. If there is fake news, somewhere there is also real news.

This new national awareness is a great advance over just 3 months ago. And we need not concern ourselves with those who can be fooled all the time (because they insist on it). THEY will always be with us, an anchor society must always drag forward willy nilly. This awareness will benefit those who can only be fooled some of the time, ultimately even the very stubborn.

[Bengus81]

6. Give this clown six months in office

And the National unemployment rate at 6/7/8% will of course be "fake news". But when Amazon adds a couple of part time warehouse jobs at minimum wage that will be as real as it gets.

[Cha]

7. that's what trump is doing with real news