From: Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com>
On 12/06/2016 10:46 PM, Razer wrote:
>Good for them. We need more real news, and less fake news.
We could agree with THAT, but I happen to believe that the main American sources of fake news
are ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, and many others, called the "MSM".
We saw in the recent election season
that these organizations were tending to avoid covering things that were negative to Hillary Clinton.
This was particularly true once the Wikileaks leaks became heavy, a couple of months before the
election, especially. Sure, there's the "fake news" meme, but I don't recall a single email that came
from the DNC/Podesta/Weiner camp that was claimed to have been "fake": By and large, eventually
the MSM simply refused to publicize them.
That's one big reason I blame the MSM itself for the "fake news" phenomenon. In prior election
cycles, generally all the outlets covered all the stories...with a different slant and spin, of course. An
average person would have a good clue that a given story was fake if it came solely from a given
source, or 'side'. But in 2016 the public observed that the MSM was studiously limiting its coverage
on those issues that happened to be negative to Hillary. I'm not saying that they entirely avoided
them, but I think most people would agree that their coverage was completely stilted.
As a consequence, it became virtually "normal" for there to be apparently-quite-legitimate stories on
one 'side', and not another. This meant that ordinary people no longer had this as a clue to tell them
which thing to believe, and which not to.
Jim Bell