With the demise of Clinton, the left has been furiously looking for scapegoats in every corner. From Russian Hacking to racist white voters and now the "fake news" on Facebook influencing the weak minded. These SJWs now either want to fine Facebook and/or force it to censor out false news (or news they don't agree with).

As Facebook is not a news organisation, and is as responsible for the news on its website as the Australia post is for the content of the letters it delivers, and given that on the internet "fake news" has been active from all sides of politics for at least a decade, I believe that this is yet another attempt by the left to filter out discussions that they don't want to hear.

My words of wisdom are:
-Not everyone thinks like you do,
-If you don't like it, don't read it,
-The world is not a safe space.

Hey Shadow Minister,
The 'Russian Hacking' and 'Fake News' isn't just a plan of the left to filter out news they don't want to hear, though is one of their general strategies. It's a strategy to have the 'college votes' defect and support Hillary tomorrow. Even if they don't pull it off, the damage they are causing to his presidency is probably worth it from their point of view.

America does seem to be in a bit of a mess
at the moment:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/17/barack-obama-fake-news-facebook-social-media

cont'd ...

A democracy requires its citizens to make informed
choices. If citizens or their representatives
are denied access to the information they need to
make those choices, or if they are given false or
misleading information, the democratic process
becomes a sham. Therefore when information is
concealed, or made up, by public officials their
actions are contrary to democratic values and will
tend to possibly damage public faith in the country's
political institutions.

Still this is America we're talking about - where
anything goes. President Johnson, for example,
campaigned against an air war in Vietnam when he
was running for re-election, even though he had
already given orders to launch such a war. President
Nixon had Cambodia bombed for over a year while
denying that he was doing so, and he secretly
invaded Laos in violation of specific prohibitions
voted by Congress and signed by himself.

President Reagan publicly urged an international arms
embargo of Iran but approved secret arms sales to that
country - and the profits were illicitly used to
support revolutionary guerrillas in Nicaragua.

Under such circumstances the people cannot use their
rights in a meaningful way.

Interesting what the future holds.

Foxy

There has always been "fake news" Just look at "the new matilda" and the "independent australia" for left whinge polemics.

Definitions of fake news do I suspect depend a lot on the bias's of the person making the judgement.

Sometimes not entirely fake but presented in a way that gives a lot more credibility than the evidence would suggest.

A couple of examples. I saw a lot of posts about the rape complaints against Trump during the lead up to the US election. When I looked into it those allegations were from a complainant using a Jane Doe alias. Not entirely unreasonable given the power difference etc but also diminishing the seriousness those allegations should receive from the public. A little truth to the "News" but presented in a way that I think was misleading.

I have been trying to get an understanding of the PizzaGate material. One of those stories that I think fit's the left's definition of fake news. Many of the claims I've seen appear to be highly overstated compared to the supporting evidence which I've seen put up but at the same time there is enough material there that's not ready explained away (unless you really want it to be explained away) that there is reason not to dismiss the whole thing out of hand. I've seen some suggestions that do seem plausible saying that there is a deliberate overplaying of the claims and evidence from some people to try and put the whole thing into the extreme conspiracy basket. Make it seem extreme enough and people other than a small fringe are unlikely to bother paying any attention.

R0bert