Why Do People Fall for F**e News? - New Your Times 01/20/19: I'm sure no of you have an opinion on this article. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/opinion/sunday/f**e-news.html...

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

I'm sure no of you have an opinion on this article.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/opinion/sunday/f**e-news.html

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

While it's an interesting article there is a more simple explanation. 1- peop-le ytend to surround themselves with people of like mind, a bubble if you will. Their opinions are backed up by their group. 2- Simon and Garfinkle said it best. "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

chrisscholbe wrote:

I'm sure no of you have an opinion on this article.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/opinion/sunday/f**e-news.html

There is no question the problem exists. What they say seems reasonable. It's hard to debate with researchers, especial when my arguments might come from the gut and that is what they say I can't trust. I do question, if they come up with fixes, under what authority will they be able to implement them. Anyway, thanks for posting it.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

An article about f**e news from the USA premier dispenser of f**e news for st least a century.

Precious, simply precious.

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

LWW wrote:

An article about f**e news from the USA premier dispenser of f**e news for st least a century.

Precious, simply precious.

I notice that you didn't dispute the article...you only questioned its source.

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

LWW wrote:

An article about f**e news from the USA premier dispenser of f**e news for st least a century.

Precious, simply precious.

mwalsh Loc: Houston

LWW wrote:

An article about f**e news from the USA premier dispenser of f**e news for st least a century.

Precious, simply precious.

"Womp womp..."

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

chrisscholbe wrote:

I'm sure no of you have an opinion on this article.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/opinion/sunday/f**e-news.html

In a nutshell this is not worth the time it took to post it. It is pure crap. It boils down to some guy got paid to write an article. This guy or his researchers have no inside track. That is like thinking a political pundit has the inside track. They get paid to blather and are not held to any standard, like the writer of this article. This article is for the feeble minded.

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

Elaine2025 wrote:

In a nutshell this is not worth the time it took to post it. It is pure crap. It boils down to some guy got paid to write an article. This guy or his researchers have no inside track. That is like thinking a political pundit has the inside track. They get paid to blather and are not held to any standard, like the writer of this article. This article is for the feeble minded.

Are you says that you believe this to be true for articles that support Conservative views as well?

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

chrisscholbe wrote:

I notice that you didn't dispute the article...you only questioned its source.

Are you actually denying the NYT history?

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

chrisscholbe wrote:

Are you says that you believe this to be true for articles that support Conservative views as well?

I can't speak for every conservative, I can only say I look for the t***h. Most of the media is very liberal and socialist so I always check out the garbage they write because I know before I read it that is is likely untrue and it has been skewed. Generally the lib media has it wrong to one degree or another. One of their favorite things to do is write an article using " an unnamed source", which t***slated means they made crap up to get ratings or money.

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

LWW wrote:

Are you actually denying the NYT history?

Name me one media outlet that hasn't had to retract a story/article.

Yes, they have a history.....so does every other media outlet.

That doesn't mean that everything they publish is f**e or false.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Elaine2025 wrote:

In a nutshell this is not worth the time it took to post it. It is pure crap. It boils down to some guy got paid to write an article. This guy or his researchers have no inside track. That is like thinking a political pundit has the inside track. They get paid to blather and are not held to any standard, like the writer of this article. This article is for the feeble minded.

If I had just asked you first I could have saved so much time. You are entitled to your opinion, but that is what it is, and only that.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Elaine2025 wrote:

I can't speak for every conservative, I can only say I look for the t***h. Most of the media is very liberal and socialist so I always check out the garbage they write because I know before I read it that is is likely untrue and it has been skewed. Generally the lib media has it wrong to one degree or another. One of their favorite things to do is write an article using " an unnamed source", which t***slated means they made crap up to get ratings or money.

Guess the safe thing to do is stick with Breitbart and infowars.

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

chrisscholbe wrote:

Name me one media outlet that hasn't had to retract a story/article.

Yes, they have a history.....so does every other media outlet.

That doesn't mean that everything they publish is f**e or false.

We are not talking one retraction, we are talking thousands of false stories.