Salon: Republicans Are Launching Fake Local News Sites To Spread 'Propaganda' (salon.com)

"The Tennessee Star claims to be the 'most reliable' online local paper in the state," reports Salon. "In fact it's just a GOP front." An anonymous reader quotes their report:
An investigation by the fact-checking outlet Snopes found that several new local news websites are actually being launched by Republican consultants whose company is funded in part by the candidates the sites cover. Politico first reported last year that Tea Party-linked conservative activists Michael Patrick Leahy, Steve Gill and Christina Botteri were behind the "Tennessee Star," a website that purported to be a local news website but mostly posted content licensed from groups linked to big Republican donors. Snopes discovered that the trio has since launched similar sites in other battleground states ahead of the 2020 elections: the Ohio Star and the Minnesota Sun...

The group behind the sites does not appear content with just three outlets. According to Politico, Leahy has purchased domain names associated with Missouri, New England, the Dakotas, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, most of which are electoral battleground states that will be vital in 2020.

Kathleen Bartzen Culver, who heads the Center of Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, told Snopes that political operatives are free to launch their own news platforms, but it's a problem if they are trying to deceive readers into believing the sites are nonpartisan local news. "I have no problem with advocacy organizations creating content that reinforces the positions they take on public policy issues on the left, right or center. The issue comes in when they're not transparent about that advocacy," Culver said... "The information sphere is so polluted right now that the average citizen has trouble telling what is real and what is not," Culver told Snopes. "I find that very troubling within a democracy."

Comments

Kettle, pot, black

[Anonymous Coward]

Salon, a Democrat propaganda house calling another website propaganda. Interesting... NOT

The real fake news is the headline

[onyxruby]

They are starting new sites with a focus on local (State) level news. Most local news sites are owned by a handful of large companies.

https://www.businessinsider.co...

These people are obviously responding to a need for news that the public feels isn't being met.

https://www.cjr.org/the_media_...
https://www.acsh.org/news/2018...
https://thehill.com/homenews/m...

Simply because a website sources some of their news from large national sources does not make it fake news. Local news companies source stories from Reuters and the Associated Press all the time. Why do you think you can find the exact same article in a range of news outlets?

Presuming news to be fake simply because it comes from a different political perspective is hubris at best.

Well, this is scary

[lessthan]

This story just came up for me and the first (chronologically) 20 posts are about how we can't trust the mainstream media and how the Republicans deserve a voice. I guess this is how a country ends, in a tidal wave of propaganda screaming about "both sides!"

Salon

[sproketboy]

Salon IS Fake News To Spread 'Propaganda'

FTFA

Re:When did slashdot become used as a political si

[Ryanrule]

Go fuck your self ivan. Fuck you, fuck your mother, fuck your culture, fuck your leadership. I want you dead.

Re:it's kind of funny,

[Anonymous Coward]

At least according to the completely unbiased trifecta of Salon, Snopes and Politico. It's fake news crying fake news.

Next up: Democrats proclaim orange man bad.

Re:Fake comments

[satan666]

Fuck you dickwad. I've been with Slashdot since the very beginning. Who fucked your father and made you the defender of the truth ? Fuck off.

Re:it's kind of funny,

[cyberchondriac]

First, you're wrong about the coining of the term. So, fake news right off the bat. Typical.

Second, it's ironic that a heavily biased, factually anorexic screaming liberal rag like Salon should complain about a fake news. Snopes has lost some credibility as well. They research what they want to, and ignore what they really don't want to touch; tilting the whole playing field; and like any fact-checking site that provides some kind of summary judgment, the final word is still vulnerable to subjectivity and abuse, as is their choice as what to actually cover in the first place.
Democrats generate more fake news by far, via the mainstream media, with it's now open embrace of the democrat party (we all stop pretending now), is full of rotten "facts". How many times have they gotten it wrong in just the past year? Covington, Smollet, collusion, Kavanaugh.. and long before that, the NBC editing of the Trevon Martin 911 tape, or perpetuating the Mike Brown "hands up don't shoot lie" that even Obama's DoJ said the forensic evidence disproved. CNN wrongly tying Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund. NYT linking political incitement and the 2011 shooting of Giffords. (No link was ever established. ) That's not even the tip of the iceberg.
The Russian Collusion tinfoil hat conspiracy to try to de-legitimatize the presidency is the biggest fraud of all. But they say, an offense is the best defense, so the Clinton and DNC cronies have gone on the attack to keep Trump and the DoJ busy so as to avoid prosecution themselves. The whole FISA warrant and fake dossier paid by FusionGPS should be enough to see serious charges brought up. That should be our new Watergate, but it's not.

You can all downvote me to hell but the truth remains unchanged.

Re:it's kind of funny,

[Sloppy]

We'll eventually find out Trump is selling duct-taped underage sex slaves out of a pizza restaurant.

Re:it's kind of funny,

[Ksevio]

Which stories would you consider "Fake" from the mainstream media lately? About what percentage do you think are factual? I'd guess about 99.999% but it could be higher. You seem to confuse reporting on events with reports that are fabricated. Pretty much all the things you listed were reported accurately, just there wasn't evidence to prove it.

Take for example the Kavanaugh case - there's pretty strong evidence that his accuser was telling the truth, but that's beside the point - News stories were often "Woman accuses Kavanaugh of rape". That's a true story. A woman did accuse him. We also have solid proof that Trump's campaign colluded with Russia. Stories reporting on that aren't fake

The whole FISA warrant and fake dossier paid by FusionGPS should be enough to see serious charges brought up. That should be our new Watergate, but it's not.

Here's a great example of "Fake News". We have proof that the FISA warrant wasn't because of the dossier, but your news stories probably forgot to mention that. Also, why would FusionGPS fund a "fake dossier"? That doesn't even make sense.

Re: Now there's an old tradition.

[Shotgun]

And George Stephanopolus (sp?) worked for the Clintons and is now a head reporter at ABC. Journalist have polled at over 85% Democrat and most contribute to Democratic campaigns. CNN's lead report, Donna Brazille, was caught giving Hillary debate questions.

But, the only thing you can see through your TDS is that President Trump talks most often to the ONLY major news organization that does not actively try to twist every word that comes out of his mouth. Yes, you tried to roll it back a bit in the last paragraph, but this left leaning MSM has been on full display since they tried to cover for Bill's perjury by putting all the attention on his sexual harrassment of an intern.

Re:it's kind of funny,

[Shotgun]

Are you saying that the Democrats HAVEN'T gone full socialism, or that polls showing over 85% of journalist are self proclaimed liberals are wrong?

Re: So, balance it out a little

[Shotgun]

I think it funny that you believe that AOC is "mild Leftist". Call it what you will. What they want is to take my money so that the politicians can decide who deserves it. In every case where it has been tried to date, the politicians have always decided that it was they and their supporters that deserved it. No thank you.

Re:it's kind of funny,

[serviscope_minor]

That's not what happened.

It was being used originally to point out stories that were literally fake. For some reason those seemed to be more popular with Republicans than Democrats. What people didn't see coming is that so many Republicans would take that as a personal insult, not a statement of fact, or that they'd simply start labelling things they merely didn't like as fake news, rather than things which where actually fake.

If Democrats were guilty of anything then it was assuming that large numbers of Republican supporters were actually decent honest people. You clearly think you won, but all you won was making the country a worse, less honest, more partisan place.

Well done!

Re:it's kind of funny,

[tbannist]

You don't seem to get it.

Even if it was supposed to be tongue in cheek, Trump asked for help from the Russians and they gave it. FBI documents have shown that Russia began a spearfishing operation against the Democrats the day after Trump asked for that help.

More basically, a government that wants to see your country fail played a critical role in the selection your country's leadership. You should be pretty concerned about that. They certainly weren't trying to pick the best person for the job.