President Barack Obama joined the liberal chorus of criticizing "fake news" suggesting that the so-called fact-free journalism spread on social media was part of the reason why Democrats lost in the 2016 election. Obama on Fake news. (Obama on Fake news)
This isn't a unique observation, but it's a crucial one: If you're not paying for the product, the product is you. The real transaction here isn't you receiving enjoyment in the form of a free temporary distraction created by a media company at great expense, but rather, that media company renting your eyeballs to its advertisers. (How social media earns money)
I do watch MSNBC for the relative comic relief.
One needs to keep perspective in today's society. |
Alex sent me this link: beaufortcountynow.com
This is the Liberal's paradise where only liberal "fake news" qualifies as acceptable. |
Good point S(h)abe.
|
I think there is a decent argument to be made that nonfactual 'news' stories swayed the election, and both sides were taking part in this propaganda method (as for whom was worse, you draw your own conclusions.) I do not think that Facebook and Google are talking about the articles written by puppet journalists for the Clinton Foundation, the manufactured crises, or general misinformation which happens to help reinforce their political stances. That is what I find unsettling. Another thing I find unsettling is that people are getting news from memes, but that's another tragedy.
|
MSNBC does provide comic relief for many but I doubt that any of its dedicated watchers feel the same about Fox.
My litmus test for an open mind:
"When was the last time you changed your opinion on a subject?"
It was the only lesson I learned from my college course in Political Science, which i might add was not at Emory.