“Ugh, CNN” or “Meh, Fox News”, what about “gross, Breitbart”. Have you noticed that it seems like it’s always the other side that does “Fake News”? Or is that really the case? It seems the validity of any story is often precluded with the corporation’s copyright. Thereby, the cursory glance will be able to determine what is and what is not accurate. Removing the need for the reader, observer or listener to decide for themselves, first if the so-called story even affects them and if they are to believe the story all together.
The news was always political, the news is a business, and like any other business the more they can befriend a politician, the more access they will gain and the easier their life becomes. Because you see, the first job of any reporter or journalist, is to sell, sell, sell. The more they can sell, the more profitable they become, the more access they gain.
So, the news is always and has always been slanted. I will acknowledge that there are a few good journalists out there, but the majority are the partisan hacks you already knew they were. Take yourself for example, can you even remove yourself from your own biases to make a decision? If you cannot, then how do you expect any journalist to?
The news is entertainment. Every now and again a real story will break headlines, that is true and is simply reporting the facts, but that only happens once in a “blue moon”. That is why it is so easy to remember the real stories and the journalists behind them. The rest is simply “background noise”. The “News” and “Journalists” are also controlled and they have their handlers as well. They know what is allowed to be reported on and what is not allowed. Why do you think there is music to every breaking headline? Simply to conjure up a feeling of reverence, since they know what they spew is hardly groundbreaking.
Its always the other side that seems to be perpetrating “Fake News”, never your own side. Do people really believe that? Do people truly believe that the 1ST Amendment was only reserved for “Journalists”? Listen, if the news media would truly report news, then perhaps they might have some solid ground to stand on. But if only 5% of what is being reported is true, then why would they feel the need to run from the “fake news” moniker? I would think any true story would be able to stand on its own merits, it would not require corporate strong arming to be considered valid.
Remember the old saying, “don’t believe everything you read or hear”. What about, “I read it on the internet, so it must be true”. Approximately 95% of it is untrue and purposely false, meant to mislead and generate business.
Fake News, is real news, since almost all of it is fake or opinion pieces.