How do you distinguish between fake news and real news?

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

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."

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.

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.

I just found this site yesterday and it looks helpful.

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

I double check with my wife....

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.

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

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.

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.