I’ve been reading a lot of articles and watching a lot of youtube commentaries on this new phenomenon called Fake News.
First thing I thought was, “Who came up with that label? Is it like some catastrophic new disease? Like the Ebola Virus or Disco?”
Well, from my own investigating I found out that it was an assistant professor at Merrimack College named Melissa Zimdars.
Part of the article about. Ms. Melissa Zimdars is below
*my own comments in parenthesis & in purple.
Melissa Zimdars, an assistant professor at sleepy Merrimack College, has mysteriously taken down her hit list of so-called “fake news” websites after her radical left-wing political leanings were uncovered.
Zimdar’s subjective, unscientific list is being touted by liberal mainstream media to discredit conservative news outlets in a move to delegitimize, silence and censor conservative viewpoints.
Shockingly, mainstream media embraced and gave widespread credence to a list posted on Facebook by an obscure communications professor who has only been working at a small private college for 15 months.
(WTF? You’re shocked? You act like you consider them ethical journalists or something.)
Since Zimdars published her list on Facebook, it has gone viral after being accepted as gospel by mainstream media using it to urge its readers to disregard the “fake news” websites she named.
(yet, WE’RE the Gullible DumbAsses Needing the ‘Oh So Wise’ Big Brotherly MSM’s Protection)
The list of alleged “fake news” websites are mixed with conservative, established websites such as WND, Red State, Independent Journal Review, The Blaze, Breitbart and BizPac Review.
On Melissa Zimdars’ Twitter profile she describes herself as a “feminist and activist.” In her spare time, Zimdars contributes to Little Village Magazine – a left-leaning magazine for social justice warriors, WND reported.
Before switching her Twitter account to private, Zimdars disdainfully mocked Trump and urged her followers to donate to Black Lives Matter.
Zimdars launched her so-called “fake news” list after soliciting feedback from her Facebook friends (very scientific, as you can see).
Zimdars explained that she wanted to compile a list as a teaching guide for her students. (Indoctrination 101, ain’t college grand?)
She did not call it a research paper or project, because that normally requires rigorous vetting. (Gasp, where’s that investigative Fact Finding Journalistic Integrity Wise & Noble MSM? SHE didn’t VET her sources! You didn’t VET yours! that’s Journalism 101? You know, that shit you learned back in college, before you sold your soul?)
Who gave this obscure teacher the moral and journalistic authority to judge which news organizations are legit or fake? Zimdars is a junior-level assistant communications professor (we’re not even sure if she’s tenured) at a college most people never heard of.
(All these high & mighty intellects are touting her List as the Holy Grail. And even if she were tenured, so what? She’s still NOT objective & did NO RESEARCH. Seems they don’t give a flying flip. I think a really bright monkey could have written it & I’ve no doubt that a monkey would have more imagination. They’re talking heads not reporters, which is why they have to scavenge websites of obscure college professors to find shit they then regurgitate in a desperate attempt to somehow appear relevant & credible again.)
News organizations such as CNN, the Washington Post, Boston Globe, New York Magazine, USA Today, Business Insider, the Austin American-Statesman, the Dallas Morning News and others spread the list like gospel and cited it in their reports.
But nearly none of them considered Zimdars’ political leanings or questioned her criteria or qualifications for determining which news sources should be included on her list.
Melissa Zimdars said the Huffington Post is one of her trusted news sources. (THAT figures)
PJ Media’s Stephen Kruiser remarked: “It’s no surprise that a college professor compiled this list; what’s galling is that the Los Angeles Times ‘reported’ on it without mentioning that it’s complete garbage.”
Ironically, no mainstream liberal media was included on Melissa Zimdars’ “fake news” list even though many reporters from outlets like CNN, ABC, NBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, MSNBC and Politico enjoyed a cozy relationship with Hillary Clinton‘s camp during the election cycle, and attended secret dinners where they colluded on pro-Clinton press coverage. (MSM = DNC Propaganda Hacks )
Conservative media were not invited to these secret press gatherings, which went on for more than a year.
And the public would never have found out about Clinton’s army of “friendly helper reporters” had it not been for Wikileaks.
If colluding with politicians and tailoring positive news coverage with the people you’re supposed to cover OBJECTIVELY doesn’t make you a “fake news” journalist, then what does?
Apparently being politically conservative is the main criterion.
Given the sham state of mainstream media, is it any wonder that 94% of Americans say they do NOT trust the media?
And I, being the Un-Fake News person that I am, have posted both sides of the story.
It is up to YOU, dear reader, in all your wisdom to decide what is truthful, credible & objective & what is just deplorable, deletable, detestable, damn ‘Fake News’.
My apologies for being long-winded on this post. I was on a roll and some issues make me really obnoxious and a bit too passionate. My only hope is that I’m not a raving lunatic and completely wrong, because that would suck royally. 😉
Facebook (Tech30) says it will not place ads from fake news publishers on third party apps or websites, because the content falls under the broader category of “illegal, misleading or deceptive” content.,
CEO Mark Zuckerberg has rejected allegations that Facebook allowed fake news to influence voters ahead of the election, and the company has not announced any major changes that would help filter out inaccurate content on its own site.
“Personally, I think the idea that fake news on Facebook — of which it’s a small amount of content — influenced the election in any way is a pretty crazy idea,” Zuckerberg said Thursday.
“Moving forward, we will restrict ad serving on pages that misrepresent, misstate, or conceal information about the publisher, the publisher’s content, or the primary purpose of the web property,” the company said in a statement.
Google has also committed to tweaking its search algorithms. On Monday, the top result for “final election result” directed users to a fake news site with incorrect numbers.
“In this case we clearly didn’t get it right, but we are continually working to improve our algorithms,” Google said in a statement.
The moves are still unlikely to satisfy critics who argue Facebook, Google, Twitter (Tech30) and other big Internet companies must do more to stop fake news from appearing in search results and feeds.,