SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
From Breitbart:
Another day, another very fake news story from the network President Donald Trump has identified as "very fake news."
CNN's Thomas Frank on Thursday evening published what would have been considered an explosive report if remotely true: One anonymous source told him both the Treasury Department and Senate Intelligence Committee are probing a Russian investment fund with ties to several senior finance world leaders close to President Trump. Only problem? Both Trump administration officials and those close to Senate GOP leadership say it's simply untrue.
The retraction from CNN:
On June 22, 2017, CNN.com published a story connecting Anthony Scaramucci with investigations into the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
That story did not meet CNN's editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled. CNN apologizes to Mr. Scaramucci.
According to BuzzFeed News, CNN has responded by actually requiring executives to review stories:
CNN is imposing strict new publishing restrictions for online articles involving Russia after the network deleted a story and then issued a retraction late Friday, according to an internal email obtained by BuzzFeed News.
The email went out at 11:21 a.m. on Saturday from Rich Barbieri, the CNNMoney executive editor, saying "No one should publish any content involving Russia without coming to me and Jason," a CNN vice president.
At least now we'll know who to blame.
[Ed Note: I debated leaving this in politics or dropping it to the main page. I opted for the latter because politics or not, the prevalence of "fake news" is one that we deal with on a daily basis from our respective social media feeds to all the major broadcast and cable news networks. How are we to tell what is "fake" and what is actually (relatively) "true"? The main stream media all put their spin on everything. A right slant for some, a left slant for others. Is the truth somewhere in between, or is it a story that we aren't getting becasue the mainstream media is so intent on telling their narrative that we the people are getting the shit end of the stick regardless of where we get the so called news?]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 27 2017, @04:21PM (4 children)
What I hate is anonymous cowards whining about the membership breakdown of a community.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @08:52PM
Yeah! I agree! What Tangofoxtrot said!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 28 2017, @06:41AM (2 children)
Paradoxically, I think anonymity is the purest definition of community. It is the complete removal of individual identity, with people left only to see a communal flow of discussion.
And personally I think people having their views praised or condemned on the merit of their views alone, as opposed to whom is holding said views, is the way society can make progress. Especially today when people are so quick to label one another (and themselves). People so often decide what to think based not on what is being said, but who is saying it. Anonymity removes this bias.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday June 28 2017, @02:46PM
A good point. But a lot of the AC comments are people just coming here to insult us/the site, not offer any valued dialog.
But then again, I could point fingers at certain registered users around here whose only purpose in posting seems to be to insult other registered users...
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 28 2017, @03:44PM
Conversely, there are times when the messenger is the message.