Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Hillary Clinton Calls On Congress, Silicon Valley To Address Fake News “Epidemic”
Topic Started: Dec 9 2016, 07:00 AM (2,249 Views)
Opinionated
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 11:13 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 11:10 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 10:54 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 10:04 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 09:51 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
The problem with Clinton self designating herself as the spokesperson for this topic is that it comes across, even if that is not her motivation, as though she is attempting to blame her electoral loss on fake news. That means a significant percentage of the public are going to equate Hillary Clinton's butthurt (at least as they see it) to a BS attack on news they don't consider fake.

That doesn't help things.
I would disagree. She is probably the best example of what fake news damage can cause.
You don't like her, I get that, but it doesn't invalidate her warning that fake news is a real problem that needs some attention.

Look beyond your dislike of the message and consider the validity of the message.
Her warning isn't invalid. It just won't be listened to by a large percentage of people. And the goal should be, when dealing with most any topic, is not necessarily to have a victim of the problem speak out, but someone who will actually be listened to.

Take Al Gore for example. He has made climate change his personal crusade. The problem is that he was already heavily identified as being a Democrat and a large number of people disliked him on that basis alone. Once he started crusading against climate change, their dislike of him became associated with climate change so that they became even more resistant to believing in it.

And as a consequence climate change preventative action hasn't advanced as far as it might have otherwise.

Identifying something that is a universal problem with someone heavily identified with the Democratic party tends to generate resistance that might not otherwise be there.

And that's why I think Hillary Clinton is not the right spokesperson when it comes to fake new. The Republicans/conservatives are going to see her as acting out of butthurt, poopoo the problem as being of no significance, and identify it in their minds as one of those "pretend" problems Democrats always come up with.
She not a spokesperson. She has the right to voice her opinion and in this case it's a pretty solid point she is making.

The danger of fake news is the issue here, not who is warning us about it.
The Republicans would be smart to listen because they are as vulnerable as Clinton was.

I'm not saying she doesn't. I'm saying that her doing so is a mistake.

And when have Republicans ever actually listened to a Democrat, let alone Hillary Clinton?
Edited by Opinionated, Dec 9 2016, 11:18 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 11:17 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 11:13 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 11:10 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 10:54 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 10:04 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I would disagree. She is probably the best example of what fake news damage can cause.
You don't like her, I get that, but it doesn't invalidate her warning that fake news is a real problem that needs some attention.

Look beyond your dislike of the message and consider the validity of the message.
Her warning isn't invalid. It just won't be listened to by a large percentage of people. And the goal should be, when dealing with most any topic, is not necessarily to have a victim of the problem speak out, but someone who will actually be listened to.

Take Al Gore for example. He has made climate change his personal crusade. The problem is that he was already heavily identified as being a Democrat and a large number of people disliked him on that basis alone. Once he started crusading against climate change, their dislike of him became associated with climate change so that they became even more resistant to believing in it.

And as a consequence climate change preventative action hasn't advanced as far as it might have otherwise.

Identifying something that is a universal problem with someone heavily identified with the Democratic party tends to generate resistance that might not otherwise be there.

And that's why I think Hillary Clinton is not the right spokesperson when it comes to fake new. The Republicans/conservatives are going to see her as acting out of butthurt, poopoo the problem as being of no significance, and identify it in their minds as one of those "pretend" problems Democrats always come up with.
She not a spokesperson. She has the right to voice her opinion and in this case it's a pretty solid point she is making.

The danger of fake news is the issue here, not who is warning us about it.
The Republicans would be smart to listen because they are as vulnerable as Clinton was.

I'm not saying she doesn't. I'm saying that her doing so is a mistake.

And when have Republicans ever actually listened to a Democrat, let alone Hillary Clinton?
They don't listen to Democrats, not Clinton not anyone else either.
Her warning is fair and valid and if they choose to ignore it they won't have a whole lot of sympathy when the same proble visits them.

Fake news and the Russian interloping in our election process are two big problems that benefitted the Republicans this time around. They won't be benefitted when those same forces damage them.

They would be smart to curtail both now if they can. All of us would benefit by their interest and action to eliminate those problems while they are in charge.
Edited by CautionaryTales, Dec 9 2016, 11:25 AM.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

BuckFan
Dec 9 2016, 10:40 AM
wilmywood8455
Dec 9 2016, 07:37 AM
She doesn't get it. I understand her butthurt, but in hindsight her own campaign, and her, were the problem.

They managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I disagree. While her campaign's failure to address economic issues was its number one problem, fake news and the constant stream of false information that found a foothold on the Internet and then migrated into common discourse on cable TV was probably number two. The campaign had to spend most of it's time stamping down the fires created by this fake news and disinformation campaign which took away from the discussion of real policies.

The bigger problem is that there has become an element of national campaigns that rely on creating and building a false narrative. We saw this with Kerry and the Swiftboaters, Gore and environmental issues and now Clinton. It seems our national discourse is now focused on attack politics and outright lies.

While both sides are involved in this tactic it seems one side has raised the level of this effort to a new high (or low) with an established network of Internet, radio and now cable TV outlets that feed off each other and spread the "gospel" and then attack journalistic media outlets that operate under standard journalistic ethics as "MSM" as if checking facts and countering misinformation is somehow biased.
Joe Biden and Ed Rendell both tried to make the case they were not paying enough attention to the white middle class vote, and caught crap from the campaign about it. Even Bill Clinton mentioned it in August (I think it was August) and no doubt caught some flak as well.

Quote Post Goto Top
 
Opinionated
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 11:24 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 11:17 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 11:13 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 11:10 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 10:54 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Her warning isn't invalid. It just won't be listened to by a large percentage of people. And the goal should be, when dealing with most any topic, is not necessarily to have a victim of the problem speak out, but someone who will actually be listened to.

Take Al Gore for example. He has made climate change his personal crusade. The problem is that he was already heavily identified as being a Democrat and a large number of people disliked him on that basis alone. Once he started crusading against climate change, their dislike of him became associated with climate change so that they became even more resistant to believing in it.

And as a consequence climate change preventative action hasn't advanced as far as it might have otherwise.

Identifying something that is a universal problem with someone heavily identified with the Democratic party tends to generate resistance that might not otherwise be there.

And that's why I think Hillary Clinton is not the right spokesperson when it comes to fake new. The Republicans/conservatives are going to see her as acting out of butthurt, poopoo the problem as being of no significance, and identify it in their minds as one of those "pretend" problems Democrats always come up with.
She not a spokesperson. She has the right to voice her opinion and in this case it's a pretty solid point she is making.

The danger of fake news is the issue here, not who is warning us about it.
The Republicans would be smart to listen because they are as vulnerable as Clinton was.

I'm not saying she doesn't. I'm saying that her doing so is a mistake.

And when have Republicans ever actually listened to a Democrat, let alone Hillary Clinton?
They don't listen to Democrats, not Clinton not anyone else either.
Her warning is fair and valid and if they choose to ignore it they won't have a whole lot of sympathy when the same proble visits them.

Fake news and the Russian interloping in our election process are two big problems that benefitted the Republicans this time around. They won't be benefitted when those same forces damage them.

They would be smart to curtail both now if they can. All of us would benefit by their interest and action to eliminate those problems while they are in charge.
No one with any credibility has ever claimed Republicans are smart. Cunning, yes. Smart, not so much.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 10:54 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 10:04 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 09:51 AM
ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 09:27 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 09:24 AM
I believe the concern is valid. I question whether Hillary Clinton is the best spokesperson for this concern.
^^^ that ^^^
The problem is real. Just because you don't like Clinton mentioning it, it is something that is bad for everyone.
Even those that have taken advantage of it are vulnerable to its dangers.
The problem with Clinton self designating herself as the spokesperson for this topic is that it comes across, even if that is not her motivation, as though she is attempting to blame her electoral loss on fake news. That means a significant percentage of the public are going to equate Hillary Clinton's butthurt (at least as they see it) to a BS attack on news they don't consider fake.

That doesn't help things.
I would disagree. She is probably the best example of what fake news damage can cause.
You don't like her, I get that, but it doesn't invalidate her warning that fake news is a real problem that needs some attention.

Look beyond your dislike of the message and consider the validity of the message.
She is the woman who while dodging sniper fire in Bosnia spent millions on paid internet trolls while rallying against a cartoon frogs and colluding with "news" organizations and she is the best spokesman for "fake news"

I wholeheartedly disagree...

This guy is the best spokesman to fight against Fake News

Fake journalist Brian Williams, who was suspended from the NBC Nightly News anchor slot for reporting fake news and lost the job altogether — and is now relegated to an MSNBC position — slammed fake news on MSNBC on Thursday.

Posted Image

:rotflmao:
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drudge X
Member Avatar

Pops doesn't get it. The left on both coastal US rely on the media far more than the rust belt and South. If anything, the left became a victim of their success.

They thought fake news was campaigning for them.
Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
Drudge X
Dec 9 2016, 12:01 PM
Pops doesn't get it. The left on both coastal US rely on the media far more than the rust belt and South. If anything, the left became a victim of their success.

They thought fake news was campaigning for them.
Libs just can't grasp that their sources of information like Carlos Slim's blog the NY Times are the fake news....propaganda mills...

The fake news that Donald Trump had no chance whatsoever of winning the presidential election was proudly pushed by countless mainstream media outlets, with the Huffington Post even predicting that Hillary Clinton had a 98% chance of winning the presidency. When this fake news narrative was completely demolished on November 8, it swept away trust in political polling and the mainstream media to an even greater degree, prompting the backlash that you now see with the corporate press calling everyone else “fake news” when they are the real fake news.

Posted Image
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

Drudge X
Dec 9 2016, 12:01 PM
Pops doesn't get it. The left on both coastal US rely on the media far more than the rust belt and South. If anything, the left became a victim of their success.

They thought fake news was campaigning for them.
Did you read any of that fake news?
Clinton wasn't the beneficiary of much, if any of it.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

Posted Image


Mozart
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 01:02 PM
Drudge X
Dec 9 2016, 12:01 PM
Pops doesn't get it. The left on both coastal US rely on the media far more than the rust belt and South. If anything, the left became a victim of their success.

They thought fake news was campaigning for them.
Did you read any of that fake news?
Clinton wasn't the beneficiary of much, if any of it.
A major architect of fake news warns of the danger of fake news....How soon she forgets the "news" that Trump is a sexual assaulting sexist, racist, crooked businessman, who has surrounded himself with deplorables...Although she avoids direct association with these stories, they weren't engineered by the Easter Bunny.......... :oyvey
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

Robert Stout
Dec 9 2016, 02:59 PM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 01:02 PM
Drudge X
Dec 9 2016, 12:01 PM
Pops doesn't get it. The left on both coastal US rely on the media far more than the rust belt and South. If anything, the left became a victim of their success.

They thought fake news was campaigning for them.
Did you read any of that fake news?
Clinton wasn't the beneficiary of much, if any of it.
A major architect of fake news warns of the danger of fake news....How soon she forgets the "news" that Trump is a sexual assaulting sexist, racist, crooked businessman, who has surrounded himself with deplorables...Although she avoids direct association with these stories, they weren't engineered by the Easter Bunny.......... :oyvey
Yeah...yknow...most of those charges against Trump stuck.
A minor detail I know...
Edited by CautionaryTales, Dec 9 2016, 03:26 PM.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Harambe4Trump
Member Avatar

Thank God the first amendment protects fake news.
Skipping leg day is the equivalent of a woman having an abortion. You're ashamed of it, and it was probably unnecessary.
#MAGA
#wallsnotwars
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

Harambe4Trump
Dec 9 2016, 03:31 PM
Thank God the first amendment protects fake news.
Admitting that you are a liar is an important first step in your rehabilitation.
Congratulations.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 10:03 AM
ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 09:54 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 09:51 AM
ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 09:27 AM
Opinionated
Dec 9 2016, 09:24 AM
I believe the concern is valid. I question whether Hillary Clinton is the best spokesperson for this concern.
^^^ that ^^^
The problem is real. Just because you don't like Clinton mentioning it, it is something that is bad for everyone.
Even those that have taken advantage of it are vulnerable to its dangers.
I think you're confused here CT. I love seeing Hillary mention it.. It shines a spotlight on her gross hypocrisy.

She's old news. She is no longer a threat to any of you. The fake news did its job on her.
Her point is a valid one. She has first hand knowledge of the damage it can cause at a personal level.

You can either pay attention to the danger it poses, or you can wallow in your hate of Clinton.
Wallowing won't do anything to address the problem of fake news and will only help to keep it going.

You are better served in looking forward and stop worrying about Clinton ever being a major political player again.
So long as she's hypocritically and publically flapping her gums about fake news, she is not old news.

I'm once again compelled to clear up your confusion. Stomp your foot and insist it all day long, but I don't hate Clinton. She's somebody's grandma. I do however despise what she represents. Cronyism, dishonesty, divisiveness and all that is wrong with Washington today. To play her as the victim of fake news can only be true if we acknowledge she's the victim of her own, and the DNC's lies and corruption.

Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 03:38 PM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 10:03 AM
ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 09:54 AM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 09:51 AM
ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 09:27 AM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
The problem is real. Just because you don't like Clinton mentioning it, it is something that is bad for everyone.
Even those that have taken advantage of it are vulnerable to its dangers.
I think you're confused here CT. I love seeing Hillary mention it.. It shines a spotlight on her gross hypocrisy.

She's old news. She is no longer a threat to any of you. The fake news did its job on her.
Her point is a valid one. She has first hand knowledge of the damage it can cause at a personal level.

You can either pay attention to the danger it poses, or you can wallow in your hate of Clinton.
Wallowing won't do anything to address the problem of fake news and will only help to keep it going.

You are better served in looking forward and stop worrying about Clinton ever being a major political player again.
So long as she's hypocritically and publically flapping her gums about fake news, she is not old news.

I'm once again compelled to clear up your confusion. Stomp your foot and insist it all day long, but I don't hate Clinton. She's somebody's grandma. I do however despise what she represents. Cronyism, dishonesty, divisiveness and all that is wrong with Washington today. To play her as the victim of fake news can only be true if we acknowledge she's the victim of her own, and the DNC's lies and corruption.

And she is yesterday.
The point raised by her is valid whether it is her sounding the alarm or someone else whom you might prefer.
Either we do something to handle it or we accept it as the new normal.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

LOL, CT starts a Hillary thread then calls her old news when he reads something he doesn't like. That's rich.

So, regarding fake news. What do you propose be done?...or do you stop short at 'somebody should do something."
Edited by ringotuna, Dec 9 2016, 03:53 PM.
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 03:52 PM
LOL, CT starts a Hillary thread then calls her old news when he reads something he doesn't like. That's rich.

So, regarding fake news. What do you propose be done?...or do you stop short at 'somebody should do something."
Well, she is old news and happens to be no more than an errand girl for a legitimate issue.
Do you think it is something we should not be concerned about?

I think that laws should be in place that penalize those that share fake news.
Edited by CautionaryTales, Dec 9 2016, 03:58 PM.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ringotuna
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 03:57 PM
ringotuna
Dec 9 2016, 03:52 PM
LOL, CT starts a Hillary thread then calls her old news when he reads something he doesn't like. That's rich.

So, regarding fake news. What do you propose be done?...or do you stop short at 'somebody should do something."
Well, she is old news and happens to be no more than an errand girl for a legitimate issue.
Do you think it is something we should not be concerned about?

I think that laws should be in place that penalize those that share fake news.
I've made my concerns known on this very thread. Pay attention.

So we pass a law, then what? How do we quantify what is and is not fake? Who decides? Particularly these days when accusations are excused as opinion, opinion is confused with news, and News is what the media decides to tell us. You simply cannot segregate the truth from a lie when the truth is simply what we choose to believe. You're treading on very thin first amendment issues here CT. Consequences my friend....consequences.
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 03:26 PM
Robert Stout
Dec 9 2016, 02:59 PM
CautionaryTales
Dec 9 2016, 01:02 PM
Drudge X
Dec 9 2016, 12:01 PM
Pops doesn't get it. The left on both coastal US rely on the media far more than the rust belt and South. If anything, the left became a victim of their success.

They thought fake news was campaigning for them.
Did you read any of that fake news?
Clinton wasn't the beneficiary of much, if any of it.
A major architect of fake news warns of the danger of fake news....How soon she forgets the "news" that Trump is a sexual assaulting sexist, racist, crooked businessman, who has surrounded himself with deplorables...Although she avoids direct association with these stories, they weren't engineered by the Easter Bunny.......... :oyvey
Yeah...yknow...most of those charges against Trump stuck.
A minor detail I know...
By "stuck" do you mean a finding of guilt in court or stuck in a pile of sh*t............... :biggrin:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George Aligator
Member Avatar

The danger of fake news is the issue here, not who is warning us about it.
The Republicans would be smart to listen because they are as vulnerable as Clinton was.

Words of wisdom from one of the few posters with the confidence to whistle into the hurricane. Fake news is a symptom of a deeper breakdown in that public exchange of ideas which the operating mechanism of our democracy.

For years, students of our system have worried over the problem of the uninformed voter. Now we are bedeviled; by the misinformed voter. This is a further degeneration of American culture, one which presages and accelerates our decline as a leader among the world's advanced democracies.
Edited by George Aligator, Dec 9 2016, 04:28 PM.
Conservatism is a social disease
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com DOMESTIC U.S. news · Next Topic »
Add Reply