How do you distinguish between fake news and real news?

CPT Jack Durish — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:04:19 -0500

There are fake news sites and there are news sites that make fakes out of real news. Sadly, it's hard to tell the difference.

Some fake news sites are blatantly so. Wikipedia provides a pretty good list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites

Then there are the satirical sites. They're easy to spot as well. Duffleblog is well known on RP and we all have a good laugh when someone responds as though they were fooled by their "news" stories.

Opinion blogs often uncover real news that real news sites choose not to reveal but it's hard to distinguish when the news they uncover is real or fakes that fooled them. Sadly, opinion columnists and bloggers are just as quick as we are to accept as truth something that sounds plausible (it fits our ideological narrative)

So, who are the real journalists these days. Regrettably, there don't seem to be many. Once trusted sources such as the major daily newspapers and broadcast TV networks have fallen under the pall of ideology.

That brings me back to my original question: How do you distinguish between fake news and real news?

List of fake news websites - Wikipedia

This is a list of fake news sites. These sites intentionally publish hoaxes and disinformation to drive web traffic rather than for a humorous purpose, as in news satire.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2016 2:07 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:07:29 -0500

I double check with my wife....

Response by MSgt Michael Bischoff made Dec 8 at 2016 2:09 PM

MSgt Michael Bischoff — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:09:27 -0500

Thomas Jefferson said alot of things I bet he didn't say!!

Edited: Must of type that in my sleep (didn't he said)

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Dec 8 at 2016 2:12 PM

SFC Pete Kain — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:12:12 -0500

The story has to pass a smell check for me, Then I come here to see if smarter folks checked it out.
Talk radio is another check on reality.

Response by TSgt David L. made Dec 8 at 2016 2:14 PM

TSgt David L. — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:14:27 -0500

I turn CNN/NBC off; no more fake news! :D

Response by Sgt Wayne Wood made Dec 8 at 2016 2:25 PM

Sgt Wayne Wood — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:25:59 -0500

I look for corroboration from other news feeds. I also try to filter out obvious bias. Finally, i ignore anything from the New York Times, Washington Post, and most of the broadcast news. Oh yeah, Presidential press conferences are pure propaganda. So where do i go? Direct feeds from Reuters, AP, and BBC. Again, i try to filter out bias, but they are reliable and somewhat objective.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Dec 8 at 2016 2:31 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:31:01 -0500

I've learned to distrust any story that seems counter intuitive to what I already believe to be true. The reality is that almost every news source in America has had to retract stories as either un-substantiated, based on false assumptions, complete fiction, or outright propaganda.

This is nothing new, this excerpt from Scientific American, claims that Benjamin Franklin even did.

"A Bag of Scalps
In 1782, Benjamin Franklin created a fake issue of a Boston newspaper. The main story was quite gruesome: it maintained that American forces had discovered bags of money and goods that appeared bound for the King, but included among them the scalps of soldiers and civilians. The bag of scalps included a letter addressed to the King asking him to accept the scalps as a token of friendship and loyalty. Franklin sent the newspaper to his friends, who forwarded it to their friends and soon enough the story had been republished in other colonial newspapers. There were signs the original document was a fake--the typeface, for example-- but these clues were lost in the sensationalism of the information. The public was outraged. In this case, Franklin's "news" added to the animosity directed against Native Americans and helped establish them as non-Americans who could not be trusted nor should be accepted in the new Republic. The story was resurrected at a later date as well as "evidence" of the depravity of Native Americans during the War of 1812."

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Dec 8 at 2016 3:07 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 15:07:19 -0500

CPT Jack Durish, I regret that I am out of up votes for the day - I owe you one.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2016 3:22 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 15:22:10 -0500

I handle news much like I do information gathered during Civil Reconaissance - if it is from only one source, it isn't a fact. Even well-intentioned sources get the facts wrong at times. That is why it is important that before you make a decision or form an opinion, your information gets double-checked elsewhere to confirm it.
Also, bias is very prevalent in news outlets of all types, the internet most of all. What is reported may be true, but it is filtered in such a way as to present them in a manner that furthers an agenda. If information looks demonstrably favorable or unfavorable to a given point of view, it is probably not the whole story.
A cursory check of the author is often informative when trying to determine the veracity of a news report. If you aren't sure, check that out.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2016 3:41 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 15:41:00 -0500

I just found this site yesterday and it looks helpful.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/breaking-news/

Breaking News

Left News Left-Center News Center News Right-Center News Right News (BREAKING) Latest Breaking News in Real time

Response by MCPO Mark Durland made Dec 8 at 2016 3:42 PM

MCPO Mark Durland — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 15:42:31 -0500

First for me...two or more reports from independent sources. Second...the smell test.

I remember when I was a kid the TV news and newspapers specifically identified content which was "op-ed". The rest was usually actual news, gathered by a reporter who went somewhere and asked questions, did research, and outlined what they found. I feel the difference today is that most sources/reporters START with the findings they want and deconstruct the issue until they tie it to what/who they want to expose.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Dec 9 at 2016 2:47 PM

Cpl Justin Goolsby — Fri, 09 Dec 2016 14:47:39 -0500

Well that easiest manner is seeing where the bias is. Whether it's right or left, most media sources have a bias. Next, see what other media sources are saying. If a story is legit, it's incredibly unlikely that only one source will be covering it. Compare the stories. When you start sifting through the bias, you can usually see the legitimate story.

Response by SPC Alexander Brandt made Dec 9 at 2016 3:32 PM

SPC Alexander Brandt — Fri, 09 Dec 2016 15:32:38 -0500

I tend to use BBC as my first source for news, but I always confirm stories with other sources. Anything that includes "liberal" or "conservative" in its name should be ignored, because they're unreliable and inclined towards stories supporting a particular agenda.

I can't say I like opinion blogs as news sources for the same reason I don't like news agencies that wear a political affiliation on their sleeves. It means they're inclined to twist stories to fit a narrative, and it's why I double check every story I take an interest in.

Response by PO3 Sherry Thornburg made Dec 9 at 2016 4:51 PM

PO3 Sherry Thornburg — Fri, 09 Dec 2016 16:51:39 -0500

I have had a running thread about this with my FB peeps since the election. Attached is my last shared article on it. If it is in a meme without a reference, if it comes from a .org or unfamiliar source, if the statement starts with "everyone knows" or "I just read it on the Internet," if there is a noticeable favoring of one view or interest or subject, if there is name calling and an abundance of negative adjectives, and if there is no researchable reference for supposed facts, then it is likely not the whole truth.
The Internet and even the traditional media is rife with half truths, misleading and leading posts, propaganda and fake news that distorts the facts so severely it has nothing to do with the real world. Be careful about mistaking infotainment with creditable news too. John Oliver and Rush are not always good sources either. As a writing major I was taught where to look for credible sources. Anything that doesn't site sources could well be making stuff up.
My dad told me years ago never to believe what you hear and only half what you read. The days of just the facts news is only to be found on fact check sites these, days . . . And then make sure you check their sources.
http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/12/05/503581220/fake-or-real-how-to-self-check-the-news-and-get-the-facts?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=politics&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews

Fake Or Real? How To Self-Check The News And Get The Facts

Your friend shares a story on Facebook. You read the headline and you think it's too good to be true, but it looks like it's from a news site. Experts offer tips to help you sniff out fact from fake.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 10 at 2016 3:22 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:22:35 -0500

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made May 13 at 2017 2:02 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Sat, 13 May 2017 02:02:42 -0400

NPR and BBC... anything else is suspect...