INITIAL RESEARCH ON FAKE NEWS
I sarted off the project by researching what exactly is fake news and how has it become so powerful. Like almost everything else in the world i realized it is directly linked to money.
The rise and rise of fake news
The deliberate making up of news stories to fool or entertain is nothing new. But the arrival of social media has meant real and fictional stories are now presented in such a similar way that it can sometimes be difficult to tell the two apart.
While the internet has enabled the sharing of knowledge in ways that previous generations could only have dreamed of, it has also provided ample proof of the line, often attributed to Winston Churchill, that "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on".
So with research suggesting an increasing proportion of US adults are getting their news from social media, it's likely that more and more of us are seeing - and believing - information that is not just inaccurate, but totally made up.
There are hundreds of fake news websites out there, from those which deliberately imitate real life newspapers, to government propaganda sites, and even those which tread the line between satire and plain misinformation.
Image copyrightNATIONAL REPORTImage caption
One of them is The National Report which advertises itself as "America's Number 1 Independent News Source", and which was set up by Allen Montgomery (not his real name).
"There are times when it feels like a drug," Montgomery told BBC Trending.
"There are highs that you get from watching traffic spikes and kind of baiting people into the story. I just find it to be a lot of fun."
One of The National Report's biggest ever stories was a scare about a US town being cordoned off with a deadly disease, and as Montgomery explains they've mastered the art of getting people to read and share their fake news offering.
"Obviously the headline is key, and the domain name itself is very much a part of the formula - you need to have a fake news site that looks legitimate as can be," Montgomery says.
"Beyond the headline and the first couple of paragraphs people totally stop reading, so as long as the first two or three paragraphs sound like legitimate news then you can do whatever you want at the end of the story and make it ridiculous."
But why go to such trouble? The answer is there is big money to be made from sites by The National Report which host web advertising, and these potentially huge rewards entice website owners to move away from funny satirical jokes and towards more believable content because it is likely to be more widely shared.
"We've had stories that have made $10,000 (about £8,100). When we really tap in to something and get it to go big then we're talking about in the thousands of dollars that are made per story," Montgomery says.
Image copyrightEMPIRE NEWSImage caption
But how much should be worried by fooled by sites that set out to get fake news stories up and running?
Brooke Binkowski from Snopes, one of the largest fact checking websites which fights online misinformation, believes that while individual fake news stories may not be dangerous their potential to cause damage becomes more powerful over time and when considered in the aggregate.
"There's a lot of confirmation bias," she says. "A lot of people want proof that their world view is the accurate and appropriate one."
And that idea of reinforcing people's beliefs and falsely confirming their prejudices is something that Allen Montgomery says his fake news site actively tries to exploit.
"We're constantly trying to tune into feelings that we think that people already have or want to have," he says.
"Recently we did a story about Hillary Clinton being fed the answers prior to the debate. There was already some low level chatter about that having happened - it was all fake - but that sort of headline gets into the right wing bubble and they run with it."
Buzzfeed's Craig Silverman, who heads a team looking into the effects of fake news, explains just how easily fake news can end up being reported as true by the mainstream media.
"A fake news website might publish a hoax, then because it's getting social attention another site might pick it up, write that story as though it's true and may not link back to the original fake news website," Silverman says.
"From there it's a chain reaction until at some point a journalist at a largely credible outlet might see it and quickly write something up, because many journalists are trying to write as many stories as possible and write stories that get traffic and social attention. The incentive is towards producing more and checking less."
Image copyrightCLICKHOLEImage caption
And as Anthony Adornato, assistant Professor of Journalism at Ithaca College in New York explains journalists are not only under increasing pressure but in many cases are also not being given sufficient guidance on how to properly verify stories.
"The policies in newsrooms haven't caught up with the practice," Adornato says.
"Its commonplace that news outlets are relying on content that folks have shared, but not every newsroom has a policy regarding how to verify and authenticate this information."
A recent study of local TV stations in the US conducted by Adornato revealed that that nearly 40% of their editorial policies did not include any guidelines on how to verify information from social media, yet news managers at the TV stations admitted that at least a third of their news bulletins had reported information from social media that later was revealed to be false or inaccurate.
So with the fake news floodgates now wide open, has the battle to contain it already been lost?
Allen Montgomery says Facebook has taken steps to reduce the impact of fake sites like his own.
"We were specifically targeted by the Facebook changes in their news feed algorithm. They've drowned out our stories from being shared and from being liked, and I have no doubt that they are doing the same to other fake news sites. Really though, if there's money to be made - and there is - you just have to get more creative."
Montgomery says he now has nine fake news sites around which he moves content to try to beat Facebook censoring.
So if fake news sites aren't going away, Buzzfeed's Craig Silverman says that more needs to be done to ensure that people aren't duped by them.
"Journalists need to get training so that they can quickly spot fakes, and people in school should learn how to read things critically online - they should learn how to research and check multiple sources online."
Here are all the 'fake news' sites to watch out for on Facebook
But fake news is real, and it's more pervasive than you might think.
Facebook, a primary driver of traffic to publications, came under fire late last year for allowing the promotion of “fake news” websites and sites that deal in conspiracy theories rather than facts. Some Facebook employees even reportedly revolted and took matters into their own hands before the company took steps to reduce fake news.
While some believe the rise of fake news contributed to Trump's election victory, the term has been co-opted by Trump himself, which he uses as a weapon against news stories and publications he dislikes. During his first press conference as president-elect, Trump called by BuzzFeed and CNN “fake news” for reporting on an unconfirmed dossier that made damning allegations regarding Trump and Russia.
Both Facebook and Google have responded by cutting these sites out of their advertising networks and otherwise making their stories harder to find. And PolitiFact, a Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking site, has launched a new section devoted to fake news.
But those sites are still out there, and someone on your Facebook friend's list is probably sharing one of their stories right now. If you want to check out whether a story is from a dubious source yourself, you can use one of these three Google Chrome plugins.
Late last year, Melissa Zimdars, a media professor at Merrimack College in Massachusetts, compiled a list of “fake, false, or regularly misleading websites” that purposefully publish fake information or are otherwise entirely unreliable. The list, which has since been removed due to threats and harassment Zimdars says she received, also included sites that “may circulate misleading and/or potentially unreliable information” or “sometimes use clickbait-y headlines and social media descriptions.”
Of course, “real news” media outlets and journalists sometimes make mistakes, including us at the Daily Dot. And when we do, we issue corrections and take responsibility for those mistakes. “Fake news” sites make no such efforts toward accuracy, which is what puts them in a different category.
Below, we've listed the sites Zimdars identified as regularly pushing demonstrably fake or highly misleading stories—meaning they intentionally published or promoted unverified information as though it's legitmate news—as well as a few sites we've discovered since Zimdars first compiled her list. We've also removed sites that were on Zimdars' list but are no longer available.
- Politicops (aka Newslo, Politicalo)
- RealNewsRightNow.com (Also includes intentional satire)
- Infowars.com (Includes a mix of conspiracy theories and real news)
- RileNews.com (Appears to have stopped publishing in December)
- CivicTribune.com (Hasn't updated in over a year)
- DCGazette.com (Appears to have stopped publishing in November)
- NewsMutiny.com (Includes fake news and satire)
- Global Research
- White House News
- Hang the Bankers
- Associated Media Coverage (aka the Seattle Tribune)
- Humans Are Free
- Before It's News
- Conservative Tribune
- Your News Wire
- The New York Evening
- Nutbar Factor (Includes mix of real news)
- Trump Insurrection (Includes mix of real news)
In addition to the list, Zimdars has created a tip sheet for news consumers so that we all might better decipher what's real, what's fake, and what's simply misleading in ways that have nothing to do with whether you agree with a particular article or not:
Avoid websites that end in “lo” ex: Newslo (above). These sites take pieces of accurate information and then packaging that information with other false or misleading “facts” (sometimes for the purposes of satire or comedy).
Watch out for websites that end in “.com.co” as they are often fake versions of real news sources
Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not also reporting on the story. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result of corporate media bias and other factors, but there should typically be more than one source reporting on a topic or event.
Odd domain names generally equal odd and rarely truthful news.
Lack of author attribution may, but not always, signify that the news story is suspect and requires verification.
Some news organizations are also letting bloggers post under the banner of particular news brands; however, many of these posts do not go through the same editing process (ex: BuzzFeed Community Posts, Kinja blogs, Forbes blogs).
Check the “About Us” tab on websites or look up the website on Snopes or Wikipedia for more information about the source.
Bad web design and use of ALL CAPS can also be a sign that the source you’re looking at should be verified and/or read in conjunction with other sources.
If the story makes you REALLY ANGRY it’s probably a good idea to keep reading about the topic via other sources to make sure the story you read wasn’t purposefully trying to make you angry (with potentially misleading or false information) in order to generate shares and ad revenue.
- It’s always best to read multiple sources of information to get a variety of viewpoints and media frames. Some sources not yet included in this list (although their practices at times may qualify them for addition), such as The Daily Kos, The Huffington Post, and Fox News, vacillate between providing important, legitimate, problematic, and/or hyperbolic news coverage, requiring readers and viewers to verify and contextualize information with other sources.
The Skim http://www.theskimm.com/skimm-ahead
fake news outperformed fake news on Facebook
fake news performed better than real news on Facebook
Can you spot the fake US election news stories?
The Most Viral Content of 2016: Thirty Examples of Insanely Shareable Content
How was your 2016? Yes, it was a little crazy. The volume of social sharing reflected that. The act of social sharing became mainstream news itself in 2016. There were many stories about echo chambers, the sharing of false news and the impact of social sharing and news feeds on politics.
We have analyzed the most socially shared content this year and set out below 30 examples of the most viral content from across the different social networks. These top viral posts by their nature are outliers and exceptional. However, by analyzing these most shared posts, we can learn a little more about the characteristics of viral content and the steps we can take to improve the potential shareability of our own content.
We have excluded from our analysis games and forms, such as sign up forms to support the Clinton campaign. We have also excluded YouTube and Vine videos. Music videos can gain many millions of shares, for example over 8m for a Coldplay video. You can see the most shared Youtube videos here. The data for links and shares was taken on 5th December 2016.
1. New Alzheimer’s Treatment
2. OCD Radar Quiz
3. 100 Inspirational Quotes
4. First Born Child Is Most Intelligent
5. Donald Trump
6. Healthy Snacks
7. Bald Men Are Sexier
8. Intelligent People
9. Women Need More Sleep Because Their Brains Work Harder
10. Top 10 Abs Exercises
What are the themes?
This is an eclectic collection from an exceptional year. Here are some patterns we’ve seen in the content that went viral in 2016?
“Science says” stories: The word “science” adds a veneer of credibility to any article. Lots of the most shared content quoted scientific research. Those posts either promised self-improvement, held out some hope for our health, or explained why a behaviour or characteristic is positive based on scientific research. We are all looking to be understood and articles like these seem to help.
Data driven content: Similar to science stories, articles which predicted or analyzed trends using data were well shared and well linked to.
Strong opinion and political pieces: This was a politically divisive year. To feel belonging in our tribes, we shared strong opinion pieces that bound us to what we believed in. These come with an echo-chamber health warning, but they do get well shared.
Heart warmers: Stories of inspiration, human kindness and just plain joy and silliness always do well, and in a year that had more than its fair share of seriousness, heart warming stories ticked a box for many of us.
Health and food: People share medical news and developments. They also share ways to stay fit, particularly short cuts, and recipes, both healthy and unhealthy.
The classic viral formats such as images, lists and quizzes also did well again this year. The big viral posts appealed to a wide audience and many appealed to a particular tribe in the widest sense such as women, bald men or first born children.
BuzzFeed News: Fake News 50
This is what fake news actually looks like — we ranked 11 election stories that went viral on Facebook
The US election served as a breeding ground for fake news, which reportedly sometimes outperformed real news on Facebook.
Using data from Buzzsumo, we ranked 11 of the most ridiculous fake stories based on "Facebook engagements" — a combination of shares, likes, and comments. Some of them were seen by more than 2.2 million people.
We also found out where these fabricated stories originated from, using a fact-checking website.,
Reality Check's most popular stories of 2016
It has been a momentous year for the BBC Reality Check team, covering first the EU referendum and then the US election.
Our most read story of the year came on 24 June, the day Britain learned the result of the Brexit vote.
'Do I need a new passport?' and other Brexit questions was viewed more than two million times, with another 1.5 million in the following weeks.
On a normal day that might have made it the most read story on the site - on 24 June, a day that saw remarkable traffic to the BBC News website, it didn't even make it into the top 10.
There was no verdict on the story - most of the answers to audience questions were that the UK's departure from the EU would not happen for some time, so most documents and rules would stay the same while negotiations continued.
The piece even had more views than the Reality Check live page where all the EU referendum checks could be found, which came in second.
Since the team's remit was expanded to include non-Brexit stories, Reality Check's home has been moved to bbc.co.uk/RealityCheck.
Next most popular was a piece in the week after the referendum asking whether Leave campaigners had changed their tune on things like how much of the UK's contribution to the EU budget could be spent on the NHS and how much immigration could be reduced following Brexit.
Despite being shown the poster on the Andrew Marr Show, Iain Duncan Smith denied that Vote Leave had promised to spend an extra £350m a week on the NHS, saying instead that it would receive "the lion's share" of money that would no longer be spent on the EU.
At number four was an article asking what the Brexit vote had done to the economy, following claims that the damage done was already considerably more than the UK's annual contribution to the EU budget.
In fifth place was the first of three pieces on the US election, this one written on the day of the result looked at what the exit poll could tell us about who voted for Donald Trump.
Among the slightly odd findings of the exit poll was that 10% of people who supported the idea of a wall along the Mexican border nonetheless voted for Mrs Clinton, while 5% of people who thought the next president should continue the policies of Barack Obama voted for Mr Trump.
The Reality Check on the first US presidential debate came next.
It included such issues as whether Mr Trump had supported the war in Iraq and if the murder rate in New York was rising or falling.
Back to domestic issues, number seven looked at whether the UK was still the world's fifth largest economy following the Brexit vote.
The suggestion was that the falling pound meant that it had fallen behind France in the rankings.
But actually, the World Bank does the calculation based on average exchange rates over the period, so the UK was still in front.
Next up was another piece published on 24 June. The BBC's Europe correspondent Chris Morris answered a question that was clearly at the front of the mind of one member of the audience: how could Brexit affect the Premier League?
It turns out that if freedom of movement is abandoned, players from EU countries will probably need to apply for work permits, which will be difficult if they have not yet broken into their national sides.
At number nine was the question of whether the High Court ruling on triggering Article 50 could scupper Brexit.
The Reality Check verdict was that obtaining Parliamentary approval could delay or complicate the process, but it was hard to imagine that the result of the referendum could be ignored.
We will find out what the Supreme Court thinks of the question of Parliamentary approval in January.
And at number 10 was the round-up of the second presidential debate.
It returned again to Mr Trump's view of the war in Iraq as well as whether Mrs Clinton was secretary of state when President Obama drew a "red line in the sand" over the use of chemical weapons by President Bashar al-Assad's forces in Syria.
So that's the top 10 for 2016. Could 2017 possibly be as interesting?
I decided to create an app where all of the top shared stories on the internet would be displayed in a cool and vibrant way. when reading the story you have the option of clicking true or false. When clicking you're answer, you will get the true story behind most of the fake news. I decided to start doing the template for this app using the most shared stories of the moment which i found on ruzzit.
After this entire process this is the final layout I have created. Considering the feedback i get this will most probably still need some work.
True Storie 1
In 2012, he posted on Twitter a couple of messages that asserted that climate change was a hoax that China had devised to secure an unfair trade advantage, presumably because the Obama administration was seeking to curb coal consumption in the United States.
“The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive,” Mr. Trump wrote. That message has been reshared more than 104,000 times and “liked” nearly 66,000 times.
On Wednesday, a deputy foreign minister of China, Liu Zhenmin, told reporters at a climate conference in Marrakesh, Morocco, that starting from the 1980s, the administrations of Mr. Trump’s Republican predecessors — Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush — supported climate change negotiations under a United Nations panel.
That was apparently an important moment in China’s realization of the onset of climate change.
Mr. Liu said that President Xi Jinping brought up the issue in his call with Mr. Trump on Monday, saying that China would continue its struggle to curb climate change “whatever the circumstances,” according to Bloomberg News.
China’s lecturing the United States on the need to fight climate change is a reversal from the usual roles and a sign that, with the United States governed by Mr. Trump, China may have to take the leadership position in the global campaign.PhotoCreditHow Hwee Young/European Pressphoto Agency
Under President Obama, the United States government persuaded China to announce important pledges in the fight against climate change. In 2014, Mr. Xi stood next to Mr. Obama in Beijing and said that China would ensure that its greenhouse gas emissions peaked by 2030 and that 20 percent of its energy would come from non-fossil fuel sources by that year. Mr. Obama pledged to greatly reduce coal use by 2025.
Diplomats and climate negotiators have been meeting in Marrakesh this week to discuss steps needed to carry out the Paris climate agreement, which was negotiated last year and which China and the United States signed this year. There has been much anxiety over whether Mr. Trump might try to withdraw the United States from the pact after he takes office.
But the agreement now has enough countries as signatories to make it legally binding, and Mr. Trump may have a hard time extricating the United States from the deal. In addition, other countries have said they intend to go ahead with the plan on their own
Final work: Global Warming
#2 Fake Story: PizzaGate
The saga of 'Pizzagate': The fake story that shows how conspiracy theories spread
2 December 2016
No victim has come forward. There's no investigation. And physical evidence? That doesn't exist either.
But thousands of people are convinced that a paedophilia ring involving people at the highest levels of the Democratic Party is operating out of a Washington pizza restaurant.
The story riveted fringes of Twitter - nearly a million messages were sent last month using the term "pizzagate".
One man even travelled hundreds of miles to the restaurant with a gun and opened fire, claiming he was there to "self investigate" the claims.
- The city getting rich from fake news
- Why 4chan is 'struggling to survive'
- Viewpoint: Why fake news is a story we all share
- "Go Hillary": The truth about a Twitter conspiracy theory
So how did this fake story take hold amongst alt-right Trump supporters and other Hillary Clinton opponents?
Let's start with the facts.
In early November, as Wikileaks steadily released piles of emails from Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta, one contact caught the attention of prankster sites and people on the paranoid fringes.
James Alefantis is the owner of Comet Ping Pong, a pizza restaurant in Washington. He's also a big Democratic Party supporter and raised money for both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. He was once in a relationship with David Brock, an influential liberal operative.
Alefantis - who's never met Clinton - appeared in the Podesta emails in connection with the fundraisers.
And from these thin threads, an enormous trove of conspiracy fiction was spun.
Follow BBC Trending on Facebook
Join the conversation on this and other stories here.
Users of 4chan, a message board known for free speech, extreme content and trollish behaviour, began posting speculation and supposed connections gleaned from internet searches. They trawled Alefantis' Instagram feed for pictures of children and the modern art which lines his restaurant's walls, and dreamt up a paedophile sex ring involving prominent politicians and political donors.
Soon there were protesters outside of Comet Ping Pong. Alefantis even invited some of them in - they filmed the encounter and put it on YouTube.
"They ignore basic truths," Alefantis tells BBC Trending. For instance, the conspiracy supposedly is run out of the restaurant's basement. "We don't even have a basement."
"Sometimes an innocent picture of a child in a basket is just an innocent picture of a child in a basket and not proof of a child sex trafficking ring," he says.
The conspiracy theory bubbled up from 4chan onto the mainstream internet when a Reddit user posted a long document with all of the "evidence" several days before the US election. It first appeared on a section of the site popular with Donald Trump supporters from the extremist white nationalist alt-right.
Alefantis, along with Comet Ping Pong employees and others, started to get threatening messages. He locked his Instagram account.Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
The fake story remained the preserve of 4chan and alt-right Reddit until mid-November, when Turkish pro-government media outlets suddenly took an intense interest.
Their tweets were in Turkish, but they used the English hashtag: #Pizzagate.
As outlined by Efe Kerem Sozeri of the Daily Dot, supporters of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan cottoned onto the tale as a way to accuse opponents of hypocrisy.
Those opponents, the logic goes, had been sharply critical of Erdogan following the revelation of a real child abuse scandal at a Turkish government-linked foundation. So why weren't they similarly outraged about "pizzagate"?
The rumour also provided a distraction from another controversy: Erdogan's party also recently proposed a controversial draft bill that would have given amnesty to child abusers if they married their victims. It was later withdrawn after protests.
Sozeri says liberal and secular opponents of Erdogan, already sensitive to mistreatment of children, also picked up on the rumours.
The Turkish tweets boosted "pizzagate" to whole new levels of prominence online. Around the same time, Donald Trump backed away from talk of an investigationof his defeated opponent over her use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State.
On Twitter alt-right activists, conservative journalists, and others who had urged Clinton's prosecution over the emails - took up the "pizzagate" cause with renewed vigour.Image copyright@CERNOVICH/TWITTERImage copyright@BRITTPETTIBONE/TWITTER
Despite the complete lack of physical evidence or victim testimony, there are reasons why the hardcore conspiracy theorists are particularly sensitive to allegations of child sex abuse.
It's known, for instance that Bill Clinton and Donald Trump flew on the private plane of convicted child abuser Jeffery Epstein. Tony Podesta, the brother of the Clinton aide whose emails were hacked, was a friend of Dennis Hastert, a Republican politician who earlier this year was sentenced to 15 months in prison, and has admitted abusing boys. The Jimmy Savile scandal in the UK has featured in speculation as an example of a serial child abuser getting away with his crimes.
Viren Swami, professor of social psychology at Anglia Ruskin University, says "pizzagate" might well be an example of a trend in a hyper-partisan America, where conspiracy theories become fodder for political factions.
"What's happening in the US over the last year or two is that conspiracy theorising is being deployed as a political weapon," he says. "And that's a very big change in the way that conspiracy narratives are being used."
"There is some evidence that presenting critical information can reduce belief in a theory, but only among people who have not made up their minds yet," Swami says. "For the people who have already made up their minds, it probably won't change anything."
Other stories have fuelled the rumours and prompted claims of a cover up. For instance, Reddit deleted a "pizzagate" thread - the page now reads "we don't want witchhunts on our site" - and its CEO admitted altering posts made by Donald Trump supporters.
#4 true storie: Brexit
Brexit panic wipes $2 trillion off world markets - as it happened
World markets have slumped in Europe, America and Asia, as economists predict that Brexit vote will push UK into recession
Closing summary: Brexit wipes $2 trillion (!!) off global markets
Final work: Brexit
#3 fake storie : Donald Trump
Donald Trump won the popular vote
STILL PENDING! FINAL ELECTION 2016 NUMBERS: TRUMP WON BOTH POPULAR ( 62.9 M -62.2 M ) AND ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES ( 306-232)…UPDATE: TRUMP SAYS SUBTRACT 3 MILLION ILLEGAL VOTES FROM HILLARY!
Update: Anyone asking where I got the figures, it was from twitter posts. Knowing the Democrat media have been dragging their liberal feet giving Michigan to Trump – finally they did, with Arizona finally declared two days ago – Trump now has the 309. Except for the twitter posts, the popular vote number still need to be updated in Wikipedia or MSM media – which may take another few days because the liberals are still reeling and recovering from Trump-shock victory. If I’m wrong, I won’t hesitate to change the numbers. It’s the job of the establishment media to tell the people the final numbers when it’s out there already.
UPDATE 11/14/16: THREE MILLION ILLEGALS VOTED THIS 2016 ELECTION. THAT’S NOT VALID! REMOVE 3 MILLION VOTES FROM HILLARY CLINTON. PLUS THE OTHER VOTE FRAUD. TRUMP BY DEFAULT IS THE WINNER IN THE POPULAR VOTE!
It has been widely reported that there were more than 3 million votes cast by illegalsand I bet 100% were cast for Hillary Clinton. Do the legal math, subtract the 3 million from Hillary’s fake popular vote and you got Trump beat Clinton by more than 1 million in the popular vote.
Alex Jones of Infowars also noted that on five Democrat states where Trump and Hillary were neck and neck, the last votes all went to Hillary Clinton – an impossible thing he said. Americans know there was a massive vote fraud – machines, dead people voting, illegals voting, Democrats calling for vote early and vote OFTEN. We are not blind. We know Democrat Party is a DIRTY PARTY and have even become shameless flaunting their dirt to the American people knowing they can get away with it. Vote fraud is treason. CROOKED HILLARY EQUALS CROOKED DEMOCRAT PARTY AND THEIR CROOKED MEDIA.
AS FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS? From 100 Percent Fed Up:
‘States don’t count their absentee ballots unless the number of outstanding absentee ballots is larger than the state margin of difference. If there is a margin of 1,000 votes counted and there are 1,300 absentee ballots outstanding, then the state tabulates those. If the number of outstanding absentee ballots wouldn’t influence the election results, then the absentee ballots aren’t counted.’
As of 11/13/16, CNN and Wikipedia are still showing different numbers.
Example below: As of 11/13/16 CNN and Wikipedia quote same electoral vote number for Hillary Clinton but not with Trump – CNN still using the 290, Wikipedia 306 EV. They also differ when it comes to popular votes – CNN has more for Clinton, Wikipedia has less.
Remember, CNN projected a Trump popular vote victory when all ballots are counted. Then CNN claim “design flaw” for the projection.
— Joe Perticone (@JoePerticone) November 10, 2016
CNN NUMBERS AS OF 11/13/16: http://edition.cnn.com/election/results
TrumpElectoral Vote :290Popular Vote: 60,350,241
Clinton Electoral Vote: 232Popular Vote: 60,981,118
From 100 Percent Fed Up:
First of all, she’s probably not going to win the actual number of votes cast. She may win the number of votes counted, but not the votes cast.
States don’t count their absentee ballots unless the number of outstanding absentee ballots is larger than the state margin of difference. If there is a margin of 1,000 votes counted and there are 1,300 absentee ballots outstanding, then the state tabulates those. If the number of outstanding absentee ballots wouldn’t influence the election results, then the absentee ballots aren’t counted.
Who votes by absentee ballot? Students overseas, the military, businesspeople on trips, etc. The historical breakout for absentee ballots is about 67-33% Republican. In 2000, when Al Gore “won” the popular vote nationally by 500,000 votes and the liberal media screamed bloody murder, there were 2 million absentee ballots in California alone. A 67-33 breakout of those yields a 1.33- to 0.667-million Republican vote advantage, so Bush would have gotten a 667,000-vote margin from California’s uncounted absentee ballots alone! So much for Gore’s 500,000 popular vote “victory.” (That was the headline on the N.Y. Times, and it was the lead story on NBC Nightly News, right? No? You’re kidding.)
Getting back to the “win the popular vote/lose the Electoral College” scenario: Thank G-d we have that, or else California and N.Y. would determine every election. Every time.
But the Electoral College brilliantly smooths out the variances in the voting proclivities among states and regions. Farmers in the middle of the country and importers and exporters on the shore get roughly equal say, as do Madison Ave. execs and factory workers in Tennessee.
Shortcomings? Sure. The E.C. can make an R vote meaningless in a very few heavily D states or vice versa. But without the Electoral College, the country’s entire population is subject to the disproportionate voting preferences of the few most populous states.
Final work: popular vote
#5 Fake Story: Sarah Palin
Did Sarah Palin claim she banned Muslims from entering Bristol?
Claim: Sarah Palin has announced that she had banned Muslims from entering Bristol Palin, a ban that is still “enforced to this day”.
Originated from: NationalReport.net
Date(s) active: Dec 2015
Claims that Republican politician Sarah Palin has announced that she had banned Muslims from “entering” her daughter Bristol in reaction to Donald Trump’s statement that the United States should ban Muslims from entering are spreading online. They trace back to an article on NationalReport.net that reads in part –
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says she supports Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump’s call for a ban on admitting Muslims into the United States, stating she once put a similar ban in place while she was governor of Alaska.
“As governor of Alaska, I banned Muslims from entering my daughter Bristol, and that ban is still enforced to this day,” Palin said. “Your first instinct as a parent is to protect your children, and that is what Donald Trump is trying to do, protect America from Muslim jihadists.”
The article – rather subtly – is attempted satire. Palin did not claim that she had once put a ban from Muslims entering her daughter Bristol, but many seem to have taken the article on face value. Bristol Palin has often been in the media over her private life, but none of that had nothing to do with any supposed ban on being in a personal relationship with Muslims.
Whilst it is true that Sarah Palin has come out in support of Donald Trump’s controversial statement, the quotes in the arare fictional.National Report is a popular and often controversial fake news “fauxtire” website that continually publishes fake news. It had a disclaimer that reads –
National Report is a news and political satire web publication, which may or may not use real names, often in semi-real or mostly fictitious ways. All news articles contained within National Report are fiction, and presumably fake news.
This ultimately means National Report is just one of many websites that publish fake news under the guise of satire. We refer to this as “fauxtire”. You can read more about fake news fauxtire websites here and how they differ from real satire sites.
#6 Fake storie: Denzel
I did a massive amount of research and my experimentation became very focused on the visuals. I did not focus enough on the final outcome. I needed to find a way to better communicate my idea to a clueless public and that is what I did by creating a wireframe after the crit.