'Fake news' should be defined properly first before it can be made a topic of debate



As far as I'm aware there's no such thing as "fake news" to private bloggers. "Fake news," it seems is just a fancy buzzword idiots use to describe propaganda. How can we even consider articles released by private bloggers as news or "fake" news if:

1. They are not a media conglomerate dedicated to publishing straight news;
2. They have obvious biases;
3. They don't even practice journalism.

However, what we can consider as "fake news" are articles released by self-professed news establishments that have wrong information or information that were purposely misconstruing to promote a certain agenda.

Take Rappler for example. Remember the fiasco with Resorts World and how the idiotic Ressa kept on spinning it as an ISIS- backed attack?

Or how about the recent brouhaha about a certain Global Impunity Index where the Philippines was a leader of which turned out to be from 2014?

Exactly.

----------------------------
Ronn Zantua as posted on Facebook.


Comments

Popular this week

Unfollowing @rapplerdotcom: On the growing irrelevance of Maria Ressa

Huge achievements crammed within Duterte's first 117 days goes UNREPORTED

Why is an agricultural country like the Philippines now importing rice and fish?

Hypocrisy of Philippines' "disente" crowd exposed by President Rodrigo Duterte