True "Fake News"

Do you remember when the term "fake news" came about? The idea came from the left and it was meant as a way to dismiss places like Brietbart from public consideration. Basically, this was an attempted power grab in which they hoped to grant themselves the power to regulate the news media. Then they could dismiss every conservative leaning site as "fake news" and then the machinery of oppression would kick in. The rest of the media could ignore them. Social media could block them. And good liberals would know that nothing those fakers said was accurate... or loyal. It was the creation of an enemies list.

The funny thing was that it struck me right away that this was a mistake because anyone could use this weapon against anyone. That meant the left's weapon could be turned on them. Sure enough, that happened. Within days, anyone accused of anything was calling the charge "fake news" and attacking the MSM sites that reported the charge. The sports world used it. Hollywood used it. Conservative commentators used it. And Trump used it. In fact, he lobbed it at every media site every chance he got. CNN proved particularly vulnerable. The left was horrified... this wasn't supposed to happen.

Well, since then, the left has tried repeatedly to shrink the term back to their original intent with various stories asking what fake news really means, and then attack conservatives in their analysis. None of these have been successful, however.

So anyways, this got me thinking. Is there real fake news? Obviously, there is some. The propaganda put out by Russian hackers or Huffpo or Brietbart is fake news. It is an attempt to create a scandal using opinion (genuine or otherwise) as fact and connecting dots using conspiratorial type mis-logic and wrongful suggestion. But is there something deeper that we are all missing? The more I thought about it, the more I realized there was: most of the news we see today is "fake news."

When you take a tour of most news sites, you are assaulted with a variety of articles that truly deserve the title of "fake news." Let me give you an example. Most news sites are now awash in "Twitter responded" or "the internet responded" articles. Trump said this and Twitter reacted. Ivanka was photographed here and now faces an internet backlash. Etc. These things are not genuine news in any way. What they are is the reporter having gone out to find random people to back up the opinion the reporter wants you to believe. These could be the only three tweets in the world to make this point. And even if they aren't, they are nothing but hot air... opinion is not news until someone chooses to turn their opinion into action which affects the world in some manner. "Bill thought about robbing a bank is not news."

Yet, this is becoming the preferred form of "news" because it's easy. It requires no sources, not research, no vetting, and no knowledge to create an article. It offers nothing concrete in any way. It changes nothing. But it sure sounds good, doesn't it? It sounds as if the reporter has somehow tapped deeply into a majority strain of public opinion and public interest. You now know what the public is thinking and what matters to them, right? Wrong. You know what this report wants you to think... that's all. This is as flimsy as if I wrote, "My neighbor backs me up on this!" Who cares?

"Comedian/Politician/Media Member/Internet freak makes fun of Trump for saying ___" is the exact same thing. So what? The guy at K-Mart said the opposite. Now what? In fact, this is even worse because this is just reporting the insults being flung by the opposition. They aren't even out of character. "Extra! Extra! Dog barks at cat!" Fake news.

I think the key lesson here is that we are already awash in a sea of fake news as untrained hacks half-ass their way through articles by taking quotes from Twitter or identifying the opinions of blogs and presenting them as facts of some sort that result in news, when all they really are is the opinion of the writer spoken through cherry picked quotes.

Thoughts?