I think there is a distinction between partisan opinion and "Fake News" meant to mislead. I have certainly read or seen biased pieces from the news outlets that you listed, but nothing that I would consider "Fake News".
The current contract is $170 million. Theoretically, the decision could be made that they don't want to follow through on Boeing doing the work, but that's unlikely, so the $4 billion number isn't out of line. That being said, there are 2 planes involved in the $4 billion number as well as a lot of technology and features. You can't just look at cost at face value. (not saying you are)
Here we go. Hillary Clinton is now blaming her loss on "Fake News". Of course her supporters have shifted the blame for her loss a number of times over the last month, with the explanations including the following: It was James Comey's fault It was Fox News and AM Radio It was misogyny, racism and bigotry It was the Russians It was the evil electoral college It was "Fake News" on social media There may be others as well And now apparently "lives are at risk" and Congressional action is needed, according to her, and soon no doubt her sycophantic followers as well. Want to know the real reasons why she lost (not in this order)? Only twice in the last 100 years has a party held the presidency for three straight terms. This was not ever very likely to be the third. Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar. Hillary Clinton is very possibly the most corrupt politician we have seen in our country during any of our lifetimes. Hillary Clinton has been under a number of criminal investigations, and based on the facts, she appeared to be receiving special treatment from a spectacularly corrupt Obama administration. Hillary Clinton sold her position as Secretary of State to some of the vilest regimes on the planet. Hillary Clinton gave aid and comfort to the enemies of our nation by putting national security secrets on her unsecured home server, effectively distributing that information to many if not most of them. The primary process for the Democrat's was clearly rigged in Hillary's favor. Her campaign strategy almost entirely relied on trying to disqualify Donald Trump, which was the strategy of a loser. Much of the country is economically in a state of near despair. This portion of the country both Hillary Clinton and the Democrat left apparently regard as "the deplorables". Much of the country has thoroughly rejected the Democrat left's "Political correctness" and "Identity Politics" agendas. She clearly has significant health problems which she tried to mislead the American people about. She clearly appeared to believe she was entitled to this position. She intimidated and bullied women who were the victims of rape and sexual assault at the hands of her husband. She took it for granted that she was going to win. She is just not a very likable person. Most of those reasons were due to her own failures and the few that weren't were because of the failures of the Democrat party. The "Fake News" schtick is getting old, as anyone who is not a member of the Democrat left echo chamber can see that these people have no intention of restricting themselves to screening out only absolutely false stories in a truly impartial and non-partisan way. This is all about the Democrats working to establish the processes for trying to silence their political opponents on social media and eventually elsewhere. Even many supporters of the Democrat left know this, but just are not honest enough to say so. In any case, it is not passing the smell test. Instead, maybe try taking responsibility for your own failures for a change. In fact, you cannot fix a problem before you first admit you have one.
Why do you even bother posting these lists? The people you are trying to convince will not agree with hardly any of those premises especially when no nuance follows. Hillary the most corrupt politicians of our lifetime? K. I can make an argument that she's the most TRANSPARENT politician of our lifetime obviously not of her own will obviously.
Those lists are part of my response to the article about Hillary trying to shift responsibility for her loss to "Fake News". I started by writing them out in paragraph form, but it was going to be harder to read like that. So I reduced them to numbered lists. Part of the reason I write is cathartic. It allows me to express myself in a way that gives me a sense of release and that also allows me to share my observations with others, which I enjoy. Some people agree, others disagree, some of what I write may serve to expand the perspectives of others in a way. It makes me feel good to have written these posts. Why do you do it? As far as your last sentence, feel free to try if you think you can do it honestly and in a way that does not reek of PC talking points, totally fabricated nonsense and flat-out B.S., but I would encourage you to not wear yourself out on that.
i seem to recall a bit of fake news when Hillary claimed Benghazi was because of a youtube video......
This list cracks me up. Its one thing to really dislike Trump, but its another to believe Hillary would be a good president. Has this woman EVER taken responsibility for her own actions? This woman truly believes she is entitled to the presidency and America's biggest problem is not letting a woman be elected as POTUS. She is so out of touch with not just the common person, but in reality. Liberals shouldn't be so upset that they literally lost everything this election. At least they finally realize they have a reality check issue (sans the blind far leftist predominately represented on this site). They should be very thankful Hillary did not win. At least now they stand a chance in 2020 and they have four years to prepare for it.
is that what you think democrats want? to label it? In the case of Facebook its not just labeling it.
If you think bias, wrong-but not intention or after new evidence show up are fake news, then we are dangerous territory. Seeing that some on the right here are posting such news as example of fakes new, and so is thinking that way, I would be completely against anything done to "outs" fake news. If you think of fake news as exactly that, completely fake and intended to be such, then there is some room for handling that. And handling that is not something that should be in the hand of government. I don't know what FB is doing, but that's up to them for the most part. As for what dem want - don't know, haven't really follow much, but just on what has been posted in this thread, it seems labeling by private company is the full extend to what liberals want. I haven't seen a call for more than that. p.s. Facebook isn't democract, it's a private company.
Facebook is owned and run by Mark Zuckerberg, who is a well known partisan supporter of Democrats and the left.
Private businesses are owned by people with biases. Everyone is biased one way or another, we all have opinions. Do you not want Fake News to be labeled "Fake News"?
Only as long as it is done in a completely even-handed and non-partisan manner, which I would be willing to bet every penny that I can get my hands on that it will not be by these people.
If something is labeled as Fake News, you can still verify it yourself. There are plenty of Fact Checking sites out there. We live in the Internet age when we have so much information at hand, it isn't difficult to verify whether something is false or not.
So you'd be open to it if the rules by which certain articles are "flagged" is made completely transparent, so that it can be scrutinized by the public for political bias? I think that would be fair. One thing I assume everyone can agree on is that misinformation spreading like wildfire is a bad thing, and social media contributes to that phenomenon. So I suggest we slow down all the accusations ("liberals want to curtail free speech of conservatives", "conservatives want to be able to continue to spread lies about liberals") and just work on the problem like adults.
Watching "reputable" news organizations, who are constantly apologizing and redacting their own stories, calling out fakes news is so bullshit. Or in other words, fake.
But the news organizations are apologizing and redacting at least. Who does the apologizing or redacting for a Fake News story? It just continues to be spread as truth.
