That goes against the argument that has lead some to say that Russia helped win the election for Trump with fake news. Spreading around something that is false and obviously so is the ultimate issue. If she had been any other person that might be different, but she was not. Her position does make it seem more real that what it is.
As for what constitutes news, you should let all the news outlets know to source and vet their claims. I can recall multiple times during the Boston Bombing where the crap being put on CNN was super dumb. I used to watch the Daily Show every day and I remember when Steward ripped them apart. Fake shit was thrown at CNN and they just ran with it.
All that said, it was pretty obvious that this was not real.
People get a large amount of their information on social media and memes.
I have heard in people, in public, repeat verbatim the below meme. This was a meme circulated on social media that became the truth to people.
Actually, these two issues are exactly what I was saying. Either you guys missed that or I wasn't clear.
1: Tweets are not news, period. A tweet on its own, newly farted from whatever source, is not news.
2: Yes, there are people that treat tweets as news. As their only news. That wholeheartedly believe in fake news. Yes, this is
why the (predominantly) Russian fake news campaign was so successful.
3: The conversion of journalism --> TV news -->24 hour TV news has truly blurred the lines. The rush for ratings and "BREAKING NEWS!" has left an unending poison on information dissemination. A single tweet, from a legit journalist or not, is simply a part of that. It might be real, or it might be terrible reporting because it was never vetted.
4: Some journalists making a single mistake, or some making repeated mistakes or lying, does not in and of itself disenfranchise the entire Fourth Estate. (this is part of the Republican strategy of the last several decades). This means individuals are, today, generally more responsible for informing themselves honestly despite the muck they need to sift through. I find the easiest way to do this is to change the channel if you hear shouting, or a "collection of experts" that are clearly there to provide "counter points" to a topic that likely has no counter points.
5: The preponderance of Breaking News hysteria and the 24 hour cycle, twitter and fake news (all independent factors of the same problem) certainly make it easier for even the most vigilant individual to be duped from time to time. It happens. The only gauge of someone's ability to remain rational and informed in this environment is their clear admission of error. That is really all it takes. to whit:
--this journalist apologized for her false tweet
--"MLK guy"
immediately apologized (but many will not let it go, as if an admission of a mistake is somehow equivalent to brazen insistence that a lie is the truth wrg to obvious population statistics)
6. "Both sides" can make mistakes, but this does not insist that both sides are equal. I mean, the writing is on the wall, here.
😀
