by Wrong. Fake news has always been rampant in the media as propaganda. It even has a name. "Spin." And older than that is "yellow press."Take spin, for example. This occurs not only in the reporting of news but also in the commentary on. The distinction between actual news and commentary is also often blurred. Major media use selective reporting and spin to control the narrative. In many ways, this approach to subtle persuasion is more effective and insidious than obviously faked stories that can easily be debunked with evidence. Fake news in the broad sense of manufacturing consent began to proliferate seriously as a consequence of two factors, right-wing radio and Rupert Murdoch's fabulously successful importing model of tabloid journalism in the mainstream.Both of these influences
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: fake news
This could be interesting, too:
Mike Norman writes The Deepfake iPhone Apps Are Here — Jacob Schulz
Mike Norman writes Who Will Tell the Truth About the So-Called ‘Free Press’? — Jeremy R. Hammond
Mike Norman writes Bill Mitchell — Latest instalment in Project Fear is not very scary at all despite the headlines
Mike Norman writes Fact checking — Paul Robinson
Take spin, for example. This occurs not only in the reporting of news but also in the commentary on. The distinction between actual news and commentary is also often blurred. Major media use selective reporting and spin to control the narrative. In many ways, this approach to subtle persuasion is more effective and insidious than obviously faked stories that can easily be debunked with evidence.
Both of these influences had an enormous effect on American politics, but they also generated a lot of money.
Social media didn't change much. It amplified some effects and it was public enough to be noticeable. But the idea that it changed behavior is far-fetched. It's like saying that social media started high school cliques.
A point that the article makes that is interesting and potentially important is that previously most people lived in silos that most people other than close associates didn't know about the interior of. Opinions were mostly private and shared only with a small group.
Social media did change that to some extents and also the reporting of alternative media that are now accused of being the echo chamber for fake news if not the originator.
But those that could afford polling did have a pretty good handle on what most people regarded as private information and this was used in public relation, marketing and advertising, political strategy, and propaganda.
Now that information is more available and that means more sunshine, which is what is supposed to happen in a liberal democracy.
How did the news go ‘fake’? When the media went social