Facebook Removes Fake Article About Megyn Kelly From Trending Topics (theverge.com) 116
Less than a week after Facebook announced that it is changing the way it handles the Trending Topics section on the social networking website, a fake article about Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly was found trending on Facebook. The article, headlined "Breaking: Fox News Exposes Traitor Megyn Kelly, Kicks Her Out for Backing Hillary" comes from a conspiracy theory website, which has more than 200,000 likes on Facebook. Its Megyn Kelly story was the topic of discussion for many across the world. The article is obviously fake. The other cited source for this trending topic was an outlet called "Conservating101"
um, yeah obvious. (Score:1)
It's just an unsubstantiated blog post with a provocative and misleading "Breaking:" title that got picked up as a "reported" article by news aggregate sites.
Origin:http://conservative101.com/breaking-fox-news-exposes-traitor-megyn-kelly-kicks-her-out-for-backing-hillary/
But this kind of shit happens so much with other mainstream sites, I supposed the reason it got any notoriety was because of the the recent story about Facebook Trending Topics service going all algorithm. A human probably curating trending
Re: (Score:3)
It even gets in some dog whistle racism while it's at it.
Quote: was brought up by two white parents who adopted him and raised him out of the goodness of their own hearts.
Re: (Score:3)
No, you don't.
Really, you don't have to ask... in fact, it's probably better that you don't know.
Let's just say that calling "news" is not only stretching the definition of the word, it is mutating it into something else entirely, and any similarity it may have to something that is ordinarily called "news" is most likely coincidental and probably even unintentional.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It is one of the cable TV news channels in the US, owned by News Corp. It is different from the other channels in that opinions of commentators on the channel tend Right, as opposed to the usual Left in the other channels, like CNN, PBS, ABC, et al. As a result, most people who are on the right half of the political spectrum tend to view this channel for their news, instead of the others listed above. That also results in people on the left half of the spectrum slamming them everywhere, including here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you haven't been watching CNN for the past year -- the idea that their coverage is right-leaning is laughable.
Re: (Score:1)
-- the idea that they have coverage laughable.
ftfy
Re: (Score:1)
Since when is CNN left?
Since forever. It might not be as far left as MSNBC, but it is left just like ABC, NBC, and CBS. Attracting money by mimicking FOX News might be a temptation, but it goes against the DNA of the writers, editors, and anchors. It's like Hollywood where all the biggest blockbuster films are PG and PG-13 rated and cater to family audiences; yet all the producers keep spitting out films that have very restrictive ratings (R, NC-17, etc.) because that's the kind of films they like and somehow wish that everybody
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Since the new "left" became the old center
No mod points today. Hopefully someone else will mod this up.
Indeed, viewed from Europe, Clinton's policy proposals sound like normal center right stuff. And she is the only real candidate anyway. Most representatives of the other party would be labelled extreme right in Europe, but I guess even the neo-fascists in Europe wouldn't have selected Trump as their candidate. So what is a normal news organisation to do? Try to pretend that a "narcissistic sociopath" is just a normal candidate and that the insane
Re: (Score:3)
The American Press has for a long time labored under the idea that all opinions are valid. This gives rise to some seriously whacked stuff. And while it might be great grand fun to listen to a flat earther yammer on about thier belief, some times the media thinks it might be more fair to include the flat earthers in a discussion about GPS. (note I never heard exactly that - its just a likely example.
And the really whacked thing is that the kooks still get their nickers in a wad, claiming they aren't getti
Re: (Score:2)
"narcissistic sociopath"
I was wondering who you were talking about until I got to "he". You know, Hillary isn't a man right?
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, viewed from Europe,
For the last time, no one from the states cares what Europe thinks about their definitions of right and left wing.
for the last time, Neither Europeans or Americans care what gets Anonymous Cowards knickers in a knot, or panties in a wad.
Re: (Score:2)
Since when is CNN left?
Since forever. It might not be as far left as MSNBC, but it is left just like ABC, NBC, and CBS.
Well, Fox News is now left of center. This is what we get when people who call themselves conservatives have to have a contest seeing who is the most conservative. Like the guy at work who built a house and insisted on wood siding because Vinyl and Aluminum was catering to the liberals.
They are all liberal, unless you get your news and truth from Breitbart, and Alex Jones. At least in some folks minds. Those are mostly peopel who only want to hear news they already agree with.
And oh, so angry. I heard s
Re: (Score:2)
I fully agree w/ this. While Greta has moved from Left to Center over her time @ FNC, Bill O'Reilly has been very Centrist, Sean Hannity somewhere on Right of Center. Only classic Right Wing have been Krauthammer and Steve Hayes. Megyn, like someone pointed out above, has been a Never Trumper since the beginning - in fact, his tirades against her were fully justified. And some really quality Right Wing people, like Andrea Tanteros, Jedediah Bila and Joanne Nosuchinsky have recently left.
Not just that,
Re: (Score:2)
CNN doesn't do news anymore, left or right. It's all talking heads all the time. Even Fox actually has news on occasion, carefully sandwiched between editorials disguised as news. But CNN the 24 hours news pioneer is basically dead as a journalism outlet.
Re: (Score:3)
So you mean the external renaming to 'Clinton News Network' was only because the letters matched?
Clinton is not a liberal. She is a neocon. Trump is not a conservative. He is just a sleazebag.
Re: (Score:1)
I never said she was a liberal, historically liberals believe in personal liberty... she does not. She's very much a illiberal progressive.
Care to re frame your statement to be something related to what I said?
Re: (Score:2)
Since when is CNN left?
So you mean the external renaming to 'Clinton News Network' was only because the letters matched?
So you mean the external renaming to 'Clinton News Network' was only because the letters matched?
Clinton is not a liberal. She is a neocon. Trump is not a conservative. He is just a sleazebag.
I never said she was a liberal, historically liberals believe in personal liberty... she does not. She's very much a illiberal progressive.
What? You just contradicted yourself there completely, smart guy. Care to rephrase your sentence until it makes sense? Here, this might help [wikipedia.org]. Don't go alone, take one of these [wikipedia.org]. Maybe then you'll have some idea what the words you're using mean.
Re: (Score:2)
A liberal would not tolerate 'affirmative action' legislation and neocons would not tolerate her feminism.
Neoconservatism is orthogonal to feminism. It's about projection of military power around the globe, not about women's rights.
Re: (Score:2)
So you mean the external renaming to 'Clinton News Network' was only because the letters matched?
Clinton is not a liberal. She is a neocon. Trump is not a conservative. He is just a sleazebag.
Gotta remember though, the right wing pendulum has swung so far right that all but one person is a liberal now. The only right winger in America is Barry Goldwater, and he ded.
Re: (Score:2)
Bernie Sanders was pretty left, though not as left as Europe, he was left for the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"topic of discussion for many across the world" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"topic of discussion for many across the world" (Score:4, Informative)
I don't mind if a news outlet leans left or right, the audience can figure that out and deal with it. The problem with Fox is that it is constant non-stop editorializing disguised as news. Even your straight up "man bites dog" story can't help but throw in some political jibe.
Re: (Score:2)
The right's got foxnews, the left's got NYT and NPR (list not all inclusive). I would take any 'journalism' from these outlets with a healthy dose of skepticism.
Re: (Score:2)
I like NPR. It does really try to be balanced, though local stations may have their own biases. Ie, San Francisco NPR is definitely nuttier with its own local programming at times relative to NPR I hear elsewhere. There are definitely radio stations so far left that they make NPR seem like Fox. It's one of the few places where you do get reasoned views from different sides without it turning into a big shouting match. So I basically get my news from a mix of BBC and NPR.
But you can never define where t
Re: (Score:2)
Not entirely, People here hate FOX because they tend to be mindless cheerleaders of anything right wing and have a questionabe relationship with the truth. I hate it even though I tend to be fiscally conservative
I used to watch it for the lulz, but the people in the places where I eat breakfast all turned to different channels.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A news media company that has a different bias in its news than the bias you're likely accustomed to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Those responsible (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Management has now been replaced by robots who replace people with robots.
Re: (Score:2)
Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked.
Sure, but then they end up hiring "RALPH" THE WONDER LLAMA...
Re: (Score:2)
A moose once bit my sister...
This is funny (Score:4, Insightful)
It's hilarious that the persistent arch-enemy of the supposed strongman Trump is a mainstream "news" anchor at a TV channel allied to his party. And a feminine-looking woman too! You'd think it would make every neckbearded alt-right head explode.
And what dastardly tactic has she used to thwart and frustrate the glorious-leader-to-be? Not asking him soft enough questions.
Re: (Score:1)
Trump is the only candidate who has said that he will not sign TPP or TTIP in no uncertain terms.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump was also the only candidate who has said that he will deport all the illegals, in no uncertain terms, many times.
Right until he said that he won't.
Re: (Score:2)
Explain to me how "most trump supporters are racist and unintelligent" is not bigoted.
Re: (Score:2)
Easy: because it's true. Just because they don't admit to being racist doesn't mean they aren't racist.
Re: (Score:2)
All women who support Hilary are hypocrites who don't care for the record. That her husband raped Juanita Broderick, even while she says that every woman who alleges rape should be believed. Now, it comes out that several years ago, she helped get a 41 year old pedophile walk or get a limited sentence, totally ravaging the life of his 12 year old victim. And we are all supposed to take seriously their rants about Stephen Bannon, alt.right and the columns in Breitbart?
I wasn't a misogynist before, but
Re: (Score:3)
His early tactic against Hilary was to suggest that women were incompetent in top jobs, because they go on the rag every month and shit like that. Imply they got the job because of their looks (likely a factor with Kelly, it being Fox) and keep pushing the idea that only a man can be relied on for these things.
He has toned it down a bit now and focused more on the crooked angle, but I think it's going to keep haunting him through the campaign and make it very hard to pick up enough female voters to win.
Re: (Score:2)
His early tactic against Hilary was to suggest that women were incompetent in top jobs, because they go on the rag every month and shit like that.
I'm wondering if he knows Hillary Clinton is 68 years old. And if he knows what happens to a woman in her late 40s.
Re: (Score:2)
Given this election is basically a dispute between being shot in the head several times with a .38, or getting shot with a GAU-1, some people just want to go in a blaze of glory.
Irony (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
But they're paying for that placement. It's different. /sarcasm
Conservating101 (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen the same thing on both sides this year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Megyn Kelly isn't fake! (Score:1)
Even if she spells her name like a fake.
Re: (Score:3)
Even if she spells her nyme like a fyke.
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Hy hy hy!
Whatever else needs to be said, (Score:4, Funny)
You've got to admit that the internet makes election years way less stuffy than they used to be.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean factless out-group bashing without concrete proof or sources of authenticity? Sure it is. That's why you and everyone like you are the problem. If we don't have to deal with facts anymore, you're voting for the most entertaining monkey. Dance, monkey dance! ...
Re: (Score:2)
You've got to admit that the internet makes election years way less stuffy than they used to be.
In other words, it just becomes shit-flinging without the substantive debate? Well it sucks that we're interested more in "entertainment" from our election cycles than actually seriously trying to find the best person to run the country.
Re: (Score:1)
Where's all the rightwing outrage? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda like when the NYT publishes one of their passive-aggressive smears.. It's expected, so why get uptight about it? Facebook has made their political culture quite clear, long before this happened.
The takeaway from this will unfortunatley be lost (Score:2)
This was actually an unintended PSA about not getting your "news" from Facebook. But that will quickly be forgotten.
Fake Article? (Score:2)
So the article did exist, but the claim it made was not substantiated by evidence. This leaves us with two alternatives:-
a) The article is false OR
b) Reality is at fault.
Now don't completely exclude b), because your experience of reality is only available to you via what information you can collect. If the information is incomplete then your view of reality will be at fault.
That said, pretty well everything said by all sides on this 'political' debate is a pile of fetid dingo's kidneys.
Re: (Score:2)
Like ultra liberal disgusting slob Michael Moore or Dances with rattlesnakes religious nevertrumper Glen Beck....
Glenn Beck is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (more commonly called Mormons by outsiders). We do not dance with rattlesnakes or anything like it. Calling him a "nevertrumper" is actually a compliment; I'm tired of politicos saying how bad a candidate is during the primaries, then once the other candidate gets the party's nomination everyone falls in line about how great the candidate is.
I'm genuinely surprised the article was fake.
I saw the headline in Facebook, but didn't read the article. I often look to Snopes [snopes.com] when I see
Re: (Score:1)
I can't put my finger on it, but I can't help feeling weird about a message delivered by the angel Moroni that led to the creation of the Mormons.
Sorry, but you're decades late with the Mormon / moron jokes. The nickname "Mormon" was applied to us by enemies because we accept the Book of Mormon (subtitled Another Testament of Jesus Christ) as Scripture in addition to the Bible. The Book of Mormon is so-named because a prophet named Mormon compiled the writings of previous prophets and historians into a single volume. Go ahead and question theology if you wish, but further ad hominems will be ignored.
Re: (Score:2)
Go ahead and question theology if you wish, but further ad hominems will be ignored.
So will your hilarious beliefs. How is magic underwear different from dancing with snakes? Less snake bites, I guess, but no less bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Go ahead and question theology if you wish, but further ad hominems will be ignored.
So will your hilarious beliefs. How is magic underwear different from dancing with snakes? Less snake bites, I guess, but no less bullshit.
Sorry, but we don't use magic underwear; we don't ascribe any magical properties to our temple garments. They serve as a physical reminder of the covenants we have made; the garments work perfectly for that. BTW, what does it say of you if you are obsessed with underwear others use?
Re: Mormon: one too many Ms? (Score:1)
When you're told something is true by your parents from the first day you can comprehend, when all your friends, relatives and teachers believe the same thing and it's repeated over and over whilst you're growing up, to be told that this thing is not true can be so psychologically damaging that the mind will go to any lengths, however absurd, to retain that belief.
It's very difficult to undo childhood conditioning, no matter which God or flag you were told to worship.
This is why outsiders and new ideas are
Re: (Score:2)
When you're told something is true by your parents from the first day you can comprehend, when all your friends, relatives and teachers believe the same thing and it's repeated over and over whilst you're growing up, to be told that this thing is not true can be so psychologically damaging that the mind will go to any lengths, however absurd, to retain that belief.
But I don't live in a bubble. My high school was only 25% LDS; the city where I currently live is 40% LDS; the office where I work is about 30% LDS; 75% of the cousins I know on my side of the family are LDS; only half of my wife's family is LDS (and she converted while a teenager). I am LDS, not FLDS.
It's very difficult to undo childhood conditioning, no matter which God or flag you were told to worship.
This is why outsiders and new ideas are so dangerous.
Outsiders dangerous? Is that why we have approximately 80k full-time proselytizing missionaries? President Hinkley told new converts and people considering joining the Church to bring all their knowledge and g
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sorry that this appeared to be a reply to (and maybe an attack on) you personally or your religion specifically; I meant it as a more general point about how we all take things on trust because we have to. The younger we are, the more easily we are influenced and the more deeply we are conditioned; these influences may become deeply-held beliefs which have no testable basis in fact or reality and can remain untouched by exposure to opposing evidence, no matter how carefully explained, proven and presen
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry that this appeared to be a reply to (and maybe an attack on) you personally or your religion specifically; I meant it as a more general point about how we all take things on trust because we have to. The younger we are, the more easily we are influenced and the more deeply we are conditioned; these influences may become deeply-held beliefs which have no testable basis in fact or reality and can remain untouched by exposure to opposing evidence, no matter how carefully explained, proven and presented. Nothing you've said has refuted that. Members of the Church of LDS have adapted to the modern world and rationality and reason in many ways (and promote ideas of community and charity which are lost to many outsiders) but they still retain their core belief in the supernatural and the truths their 19th century founders revealed to them, as do you. I'm guessing that you believe what you do because you grew up around Salt Lake City and your parents taught you their beliefs; your truth is very regional.
When are the worthy females going to get a go?
Religious organizations face a tough situation: they cannot disavow what previous leaders have said without declaring those leaders mistaken (or worse), but they must adjust for the modern world. Mormonism addresses this by sustaining the President of the Church as a Prophet who is able to receive revelation for the whole world (he is considered God's mouthpiece and all people are God's children) and to change Church doctrine and policies. Mormonism got its beginning in 1820 through Joseph's First Vision, t
Re: (Score:2)
A bunch of gullible rubes believing what some jack-off "read" off of some sketchy tablets. Same bunch of gullible rubes still believing it when, after a skeptic asks him to reread them presuming it would result in a verbatim repetition that could potentially suggest some truth, he says he's "not allowed to" and will "read" from a new set of tablets that say generally the same thing but not verbatim. You've had over 150 years to decode that scam and you still haven't. How do you look yourself in the mirror and NOT see an absolute moron?
Ad hominems galore! Are you capable of debating without resorting to name calling?
I believe you are referring to the lost 116 pages known as the Book of Lehi? As Joseph dictated the translation, Oliver Cowdery only made a single copy. Oliver convinced Joseph to let him show his wife and others. Those pages got stolen, so no known unaltered edition was in neutral hands. If Joseph wree to retranslate the same section of plates, it would have been a trap. If he produced a verbattim copy, the enemies of the Chu
Re: (Score:2)