Just in the last week, I've seen three glaring examples of fake news (probably amongst many) coming from what are supposedly the most prestigious outlets in the world. In this case, Politico, The New York Times and one from the BBC. All of them are over somewhat trivial matters, but these mistakes are so egregious that some random blogger should be ashamed to make them. It almost makes one ask the question; What is the difference between these supposedly prestigious news outlets and those alternative sources they keep telling me are #fakenews.
Example 1: Hatgate
So the White House had an Easter Egg Roll and a kid asked for Trump to sign his hat. This is how Politico reported it:
And yes, it looks like Trump throws it off into the crowd, a wider view shows he just threw it right back to him as the unedited wide angle makes easy to see:
Yet Politico as well as The Young Turks, BuzzFeed and many others reported he just threw it back into the crowd. I mean honestly, what kind of fact checking do they guys even do? OK, with The Young Turks and BuzzFeed, the question needn't even be asked.
2. Super Bowl Picturegate
So the New England Patriots showed up at the White House to celebrate winning the Super Bowl again and The New York Times decided to compare it to the photo from when they won in 2014 and Obama was president:
Then they got owned by the New England Patriots:
Ahh, to be fact checked by a football team... Yes, these guys should really be able to tell us what is and what is not fake news.
3. Mixing Up two Protestsgate
So there was a big street fight in Berkeley the other week when Antifa attacked a free speech rally. There was also some liberal protests on tax day for Donald Trump to release his tax returns. They were very different.
So the BBC blurred the two together and made it sound like the Trump supporters attacked the tax day protest when they didn't even take place anywhere near each other. Then the BBC try to cover its tracks. It's hard to believe this wasn't done on purpose
All of this is rather trivial. It doesn't compare with, say, covering up a genocide for Stalin. But these are pathetic mistakes and it certainly makes it seem that the mainstream press has a much better record than the alternative media when it comes to printing nonsense. And furthermore, the mainstream press is beholden to major corporations and the very politicians they rely on for access. These are bad incentives.
The situation is bad and probably going to get worse. For a better understanding of why so much news is fake as well as hyper-partisan (from both mainstream and alternative sources), I recommend watching this video by independent journalist Tim Poole:
"Every day is a new life to the wise man."
The Righteous Mind
Star Slate Codex
Consulting by RPM