Yes, it’s time once again to Pit those “satire” news sites that make up realistic looking crap for clickbait, then hide the disclaimer somewhere.
That is NOT satire. The Onion is satire. You are just LYING for ad hits and causing real damage to real people in the bargain. Yes, those people should vet their sources more carefully, but it’s pretty plain that those sites often go to a lot of trouble to look genuine, all to line their own pockets, and then have the gall to hide behind “satire.”
Some examples here, under “satire,” but the National Report is one that constantly comes up on Snopes (which is another good place to find examples; they’ve been having to do a lot of cleanup on people like this lately).
The ones that are obviously absurd, I don’t mind. It’s the ones that make up realistic sounding news that I’m Pitting.
For more examples, check out the satire tag on Snopes. There are definitely ones there that push the boundaries of belief and absurdity, but others are way too realistic and plausible to be “satire.”
I should’ve linked all this to begin with, I realize, but I was in the middle of high annoyance. My apologies.
For examples go to 60% of Snope’s debunkings. Unneeded if these cunts didn’t exist. And after that, still unneeded since only the great gullible mass take the claims as possible.
This pitting is very, very real and utterly needed.
Well, my logic is that hoaxes like this travel all sides of the political spectrum, and are sometimes explicitly political in nature. So no matter where you stand on various issues, I believe there’s a not half bad chance that hoaxes like these hurt by damaging the credibility of causes that are trying to bring about good results. After all, basing these things on controversies brings in more eyeballs.
To take a specific example, either of the ones in the Snopes link above about current politicians make both the politician’s side AND their opponent’s side look bad if the story were spread as fact.
Indirectly, but yes, although I’ve been very annoyed at the stuff coming up on Snopes for quite some time. The personal angle just inspired me to actually post about it.
It’s unfair to people like Bush and Obama if one makes up stuff about them going on bear molesting expeditions, because it is a lie and they shouldn’t have to deal with that crap.
Additionally if all these lies float around, are debunked, then refloat, eventually people become unable to know truth and the bad things messers Bush and Obama do do become lost in a grey area of truth/untruth.
This has pretty much happened with British newspapers, which partisan lying media most now trust as much as they do politicians.
Hold on, I know there’s a lot of crazy shit going on in the media … but all that about Donald Trump isn’t satire … he really is saying that stuff … so it’s not satire …
Politicians having to deal with lies about them? This is shocking stuff, especially given their own unfailing honesty.
But come on, this is nothing new. Rumor is up to her usual shenanigans, as when she acted as Prologue in Henry IV Part 2 (wearing a costume covered in painted tongues):
The internet has been a real boon to the old girl.
The point is, they aren’t rumors. They aren’t things that the writers think are true. They’re intentionally false, as a type of joke.
Another aspect is that so much of it doesn’t seem to actually have a satirical point to make. The “satire” seems to just be on how gullible people are.