"Fake" or "Fast" News (Not just Politics anymore)

[robzo100]

etking said:

Many media reports about Trump are Fake News. Like the Terror attack in Sweden of which he never talked about in his speech. (I watched the whole event and he was completely misunderstood and never said or meant that there has been a terror attack, he usually speaks about the extreme rise in crime and violence against women in Sweden and Germany and meant it that way. The reporter creating the false story must have never watched a Trump speech before. Also in Swedish local newspapers there are daily stories about many crimes commited by illegal immigrants or ISIS members because these are really happening)

But I also think that the term fake news is not not the best.

There are completely false news, but this is less than 1% of what falls under the fake news label.
Then there are one sided and biased news that focus on a very small part of the truth while leaving out other more or equally important parts, which leads to a false conclusion.
Then there are news based on fake facts or manipulated statistics, nearly all fact checking results fall under that category because they often are not true or based on fake facts or ideology.

Many of the fake news are debatable. Both sides cannot prove or disprove a fact or argument because their sources are biased or the very complex truth depends on the point of view. The world is complex and often there is not just a simple true or false.

This is definitely part of what I want to be communicated to the public at large. Unpacking the term; 100%-false stories, Partly-false stories, and then trivialized stories due to bias(as I linked in the OP). And the bias isn't necessarily on part of the reporter/organization, but it's just the bias that is driving ratings at the time (the consumer).

This is why the term is kind of unhinging ppl imo. It means many things.