The News claiming Fake News swung the election has been declared Fake

The News claiming Fake News swung the election has been declared Fake...

Study: Claim That Fake News Swung Election Is Fake
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/study-claim-that-fake-news-swung-election-is-fake.html

The long list of reasons why Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton last November should not include the rash of false stories spread largely through social media, commonly referred to as “fake news,” according to a study to be published Monday.

Entitled “Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election,” the research from professors at Stanford and NYU found that even though false stories that favored Trump far outnumbered those favoring Clinton, their impact was negligible. “Only a small fraction of Americans” saw the stories, the paper says, and an even smaller group actually believed them.

The study, which relied on web-browsing data and a post-election survey of 1,200 people, also found that the impact of social media in general tends to be overstated. In fact, wire services and local TV news remain a more popular source of information than partisan cable-news networks and websites that conjure their stories out of thin air. In short, no matter how much social media seemed to be driving the conversation during the 2016 election, the report says, TV was “more important by a large margin.”
 
Going to need politifact to check this article before i believe it, might be a fake. :D

The News claiming Fake News swung the election has been declared Fake...

Study: Claim That Fake News Swung Election Is Fake
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/study-claim-that-fake-news-swung-election-is-fake.html

The long list of reasons why Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton last November should not include the rash of false stories spread largely through social media, commonly referred to as “fake news,” according to a study to be published Monday.

Entitled “Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election,” the research from professors at Stanford and NYU found that even though false stories that favored Trump far outnumbered those favoring Clinton, their impact was negligible. “Only a small fraction of Americans” saw the stories, the paper says, and an even smaller group actually believed them.

The study, which relied on web-browsing data and a post-election survey of 1,200 people, also found that the impact of social media in general tends to be overstated. In fact, wire services and local TV news remain a more popular source of information than partisan cable-news networks and websites that conjure their stories out of thin air. In short, no matter how much social media seemed to be driving the conversation during the 2016 election, the report says, TV was “more important by a large margin.”
 
Whether or not the Russians hacked the DNC is irrelevant. Hillary lost because she is mean nasty bitch. The hack had nothing to do with it.
 
Seriously?

CNN looking for reporter to cover 'wave' of 'fake news'

CNN, whose coverage has been targeted recently by President-elect Donald Trump, is looking for a reporter to cover "fake news."

"CNNMoney is expanding its Media team," a Turner job advertisement reads.

"We're going to be examining the wave of 'fake news' stories and the people behind them, but more than that we're going to be looking at truth — what happened to it, why so many of us no longer believe it, and where those people are going to get their information instead."

CNN wants someone with six years of writing and reporting experience who gets "angry every time they see an inaccuracy."

http://thehill.com/media/315043-cnn-looking-for-reporter-to-cover-wave-of-fake-news



What are the odds they will call out their own bosses for the fake shit they try to pass as news?
 
Seriously?

CNN looking for reporter to cover 'wave' of 'fake news'

CNN, whose coverage has been targeted recently by President-elect Donald Trump, is looking for a reporter to cover "fake news."

"CNNMoney is expanding its Media team," a Turner job advertisement reads.

"We're going to be examining the wave of 'fake news' stories and the people behind them, but more than that we're going to be looking at truth — what happened to it, why so many of us no longer believe it, and where those people are going to get their information instead."

CNN wants someone with six years of writing and reporting experience who gets "angry every time they see an inaccuracy."

http://thehill.com/media/315043-cnn-looking-for-reporter-to-cover-wave-of-fake-news



What are the odds they will call out their own bosses for the fake shit they try to pass as news?

In other news.... CNN covers itself.
 
Back
Top