pizzagate creepy pedophile conspiracy

The Oi said:

I'm in agreement that social media platforms have a responsibility to their users to remove fake news advertised by fake groups from their users feeds. This is different than what @Notorious is talking about, because he's referring to the state censoring free speech.

Facebook already kills groups that are dedicated to bullying or don't allow ads that have a certain amount of text in them. They also don't allow ads that advertise fake products or ads that push products that have shady reputations, like penis lengthening, certain supplements, porn, etc.

Facebook, twitter and other social media extending their right to remove fake news from your feed doesn't seem to be that much of an extension from removing fake products from your feed.

Click to expand...

So again if these platforms censor things that AZ likes is he/she going to throw a hissy fit? Is facebook going to hire a staff of fact checkers to review news sites? Are they going to hire people to police viral misinformation from users own posts? What consitutes fake news? Are you intelligent enough to understand that the potential for abuse is ungodly. AZ_ obviously is not. People have been reading weekly world news and other tripe like that since the beginning of the printing press. That's called freedom.

Remember when democrats were against the 1%? Now they want to empower corporations to decide what people can read and view? You know this ultimately heads to the government.

Notorious said:

So again if these platforms censor things that AZ likes is he/she going to throw a hissy fit? Is facebook going to hire a staff of fact checkers to review news sites? Are they going to hire people to police viral misinformation from users own posts? What consitutes fake news? Are you intelligent enough to understand that the potential for abuse is ungodly. AZ_ obviously is not. People have been reading weekly world news and other tripe like that since the beginning of the printing press. That's called freedom.

Remember when democrats were against the 1%? Now they want to empower corporations to decide what people can read and view? You know this ultimately heads to the government.

Click to expand...

You still don't quite seem to understand what fake news is, instead choosing to foolishly link it to outlets you perceived to be biased.

There are many good ideas for making this a simple process, Twitter has done a much better job in this regard.

You can read more here:

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...e-news-problem-experts-pitch-ideas-algorithms


I hope you'll overcome your own bias and read it.

AZ_ said:

You still don't quite seem to understand what fake news is, instead choosing to foolishly link it to outlets you perceived to be biased.

There are many good ideas for making this a simple process, Twitter has done a much better job in this regard.

You can read more here:

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...e-news-problem-experts-pitch-ideas-algorithms


I hope you'll overcome your own bias and read it.

Click to expand...

I'm talking about you and not with you because I'd like to speak to someone who is mildly intelligent at the minimum. If I want to hear the liberal dailies I'll just check Huffpo.

Notorious said:

So again if these platforms censor things that AZ likes is he/she going to throw a hissy fit? Is facebook going to hire a staff of fact checkers to review news sites? Are they going to hire people to police viral misinformation from users own posts? What consitutes fake news? Are you intelligent enough to understand that the potential for abuse is ungodly. AZ_ obviously is not. People have been reading weekly world news and other tripe like that since the beginning of the printing press. That's called freedom.

Remember when democrats were against the 1%? Now they want to empower corporations to decide what people can read and view? You know this ultimately heads to the government.

Click to expand...

Eh, you guys calling each other unintelligent is a bad look. Neither of you are unintelligent. I don't get why you guys need to insult each other's intelligence.

They're able to fact check dick lengthening pills, porn and supplements and keep them off the site as advertisements and boosts. I think they should have free reign to limit fake news as boosts if it has certain known elements to it that are known to be bullshit that are harmful to readers or just dialogue in general.

As for people sharing fake news, writing it and using it on some smaller level..whatever. The issue is when it gets going on a macro-level and these stories start to trend and people who are trying to acquire real news are bombarded with it and it impacts elections or it affects people's personal lives.

@AZ_ linked an article that gives some pretty good solutions that also illustrates just how difficult it is to discern fake from real and to stop it from propagating.

The option I like is a fake news label.

Notorious said:

I'm talking about you and not with you because I'd like to speak to someone who is mildly intelligent at the minimum. If I want to hear the liberal dailies I'll just check Huffpo.

Click to expand...

I linked an article from The Guardian, you should check that out.

Your HuffPo jokes are phenomenal though. Great work.

Notorious said:

someone who is mildly intelligent at the minimum.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the compliment BTW!!!

David. said:

..the results are the same?

You're manipulating people.

Give me the actual differences, meta Not just the details.

I won't insult your intelligence or tout my own in my post, either.

Click to expand...

NO NO NO and NO

A story that contains opinion titled to one view and a totally fabricated story are not the same thing at all. Did you ever study Journalism? You would fail the the 100 level course my man.

Not that the tilted story is good journalism, but you cant say they are both the same.

I have taught journalism in HS in the past. I can not believe we are trying to say FAKE NEWS that is bogus is the same as someone who wrongly injects their opinion. They are very different cases. One is poor journalism and one is not journalism at all. You learn this in Journalism 101!

Making stuff up is called fictional creative writing. It is not ever news. Holy crap we have third graders that know better.

AZ_ said:

You still don't quite seem to understand what fake news is, instead choosing to foolishly link it to outlets you perceived to be biased.

There are many good ideas for making this a simple process, Twitter has done a much better job in this regard.

You can read more here:

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...e-news-problem-experts-pitch-ideas-algorithms


I hope you'll overcome your own bias and read it.

Click to expand...

My issue w/ this article is that it's making a premature leap. It's answering the question, "How can we technically solve this problem?", when I feel the question of, "Should we technically solve this problem", remains at debate.

We have had fake news forever. It even shared the same news stand with our mainstream news. As a child, I could discern the difference between say, People opposed to Star and Enquirer as we checked out of the grocery.

We need to teach folks to critically think. If you choose to accept a world in which there should be blind trust to those who feed you news, you're much more trusting than I.

I knew as soon as I saw the media outrage (clue #1 that something crappy is about to follow) that a white-list for news would be suggested and embraced. Despite the major 1st amendment issues w/ that suggestion, it would get floated and get popular support because we're really bad at trying to kill our freedoms (see 2nd amendment issues).

ajz20 said:

NO NO NO and NO

A story that contains opinion titled to one view and a totally fabricated story are not the same thing at all. Did you ever study Journalism? You would fail the the 100 level course my man.

Not that the tilted story is good journalism, but you cant say they are both the same.

I have taught journalism in HS in the past. I can not believe we are trying to say FAKE NEWS that is bogus is the same as someone who wrongly injects their opinion. They are very different cases. One is poor journalism and one is not journalism at all. You learn this in Journalism 101!

Making stuff up is called fictional creative writing. It is not ever news. Holy crap we have third graders that know better.

Click to expand...

1. calm down.

2. explain the end difference.


you have either missed the point or not read what I wrote.

im not impressed wtih your journalism education, im even less impressed by your unwarranted condescension, but least impressed by your ability to see big picture.


reporting with such a slant, and ONLY on half the story that furthers your agenda, HAS THE SAME RESULT AS A FICTIONAL STORY. they are both created with the INTENT TO MANIPULATE; except 'real news' is agenda pushing masquerading as data driven journalism and includes TIDBITS of SLANTED FACTS, making them more powerful than 'fictional stories', because any research would show its fraudulent.

and obviously, 'MAINSTREAM MEDIA' reaches more people than a fake news story on facebook. thats... in the title. mainstream.

holy crap we have someone studying journalism and cant wait to shout it from the rooftop, but in doing so they miss the entire premise of the conversation and cmopletely ignore the context, while making themselves look absolutely stupid by adding snark to it.

get a clue, and try not to miss the point next time.

You guys are boring me.

There's straight Ci Ci's Sandusky shit going on and you guys are debating the difference between front page news and the comics section.


Dilbert isn't real!!!!

David. said:

and obviously, 'MAINSTREAM MEDIA' reaches more people than a fake news story on facebook. thats... in the title. mainstream.

Click to expand...

This is fast becoming a misnomer.

You must have missed this part in your masters level journalism classes.

The entire concept of "mainstream" media is becoming a misnomer because of the distrust people have of the media itself.

It's why organizations like Breitbart have viewership rates soaring in spite of their lack of credibility, while the "mainstream" is declining.

In simpler terms, fake news is far more viral and more attention grabbing than the actual news.

44 percent of all adults get their news through fucking Facebook.

So when they see "FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email Leaks Found Dead"...guess which story is getting more shares?

AZ_ said:

This is fast becoming a misnomer.

You must have missed this part in your masters level journalism classes.

The entire concept of "mainstream" media is becoming a misnomer because of the distrust people have of the media itself.

It's why organizations like Breitbart have viewership rates soaring in spite of their lack of credibility, while the "mainstream" is declining.

In simpler terms, fake news is far more viral and more attention grabbing than the actual news.

44 percent of all adults get their news through fucking Facebook.

So when they see "FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email Leaks Found Dead"...guess which story is getting more shares?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

bringing this over here. current poll. as many people believe breitbart is credible as people think a literally satirical publication is.

i know youre not conflating my argument, but for others who are, all news should be inspected.

Wrathe said:

We need to teach folks to critically think. If you choose to accept a world in which there should be blind trust to those who feed you news, you're much more trusting than I.

Click to expand...

This is why we will have unconstitutional laws and a Ministry of Propaganda. The federal government has spent billions and billions of dollars shaping education to their liking. Kids are taught to pass standardized tests and that the government will fix anything that troubles them.

Critical thinking isn't in the curriculum and for good reason. If people could think for themselves, many of them would realize what this country is turning into. People having been taught that their public servants are benevolent and trustworthy, you and I already know most people would trust the next Joseph Goebbels implicitly and without question. It is so much easier than having to check sources and question motives.

Back on my home planet . we had a similar issue.

It started with teaching people how to distinguish an editorial from a news report as well as how to differentiate Opinion from fact.

also to ask questions before coming to conclusions.

pizzagate was a perfect example of someone taking legitimate reports of child slavery in Haiiti and trailing it to an art collection . then trailing it to a pizza chain owned by a homosexual and then preying on the masses sensibilities and bigotry.

Comet pizza was a perfect target as the owners twitter feed is very extroverted

I'm not sure if Kim nble drew that mural at Comet Pizza however once linked Kim nobles entire portfolio was then associated with the place.

Storage containers were called cages. things typical of the adult gay lifestyle were then showcased along completely normal pictures and used to cast a shadow of something nefarious because of unrelated sidebar conversations.


Ultimately though there has been no accusations or complaints against the pizza establishment by any alleged victims. no evidentiary trail that would be involved if there was any truth to the activities being stated occurring

certainly not enough to warrant people going to this establishment and open fire.