Phony 'news' portals surpass U.S. newspaper sites, researchers say

"The odds are now better than 50-50 that if you see a news website purporting to cover local news, it's fake," the NewsGuard report said.

And this constitutes most of the media diet of the corporate funded alt-right.

And the legacy media does itself no favors by putting its content behind paywalls. They do have actual journalists to pay though.

Well yeah, Facebook and TikTok surpass US newspaper sites.

No wonder since they provide an open alternative to the selectively edited news and biased narratives provided on MSM

The MSM has its problems, but by reading the views of alternative media watchers, it made my belief that the MSM is preferable much stronger.

Ramsey's KitchenToday 03:51 pm JST

Well yeah, Facebook and TikTok surpass US newspaper sites.

No wonder since they provide an open alternative to the selectively edited news and biased narratives provided on MSM. If its not on X and Tik Tok , it didnt happen, lol.

Sometimes if it is on X and Tik Tok, it didn't happen, lol.

The MSM brought this on themselves...reap what you sew

Newsguard- that right there is a red flag!!! look into who funds ‘ newsguard’ and how it came into being. Until you know this, you chaps attacking the right should zip it.

Rachel Maddow recently claiming she’s worried Trump going to throw her in a camp. While not too long ago Clinton and others were saying conservatives need deprogramming and reeducation camps. mainstream media is scared and they are loosing viewership in droves. The mass propaganda isn’t working as well as they like anymore. So next thing you know ‘Newsguard’ (wink wink) is a neutral party supposedly telling us which news sources we should trust. As usual follow the money for who is behind newsguard

Rachel Maddow recently claiming she’s worried Trump going to throw her in a camp. While not too long ago Clinton and others were saying conservatives need deprogramming and reeducation camps. mainstream media is scared and they are loosing viewership in droves

What sources would you recommend?

JiMizo

Preferably someone who had been leaning left or were on the left but now are leaning right is a good start

It's that old right wing trope where they think they have the secret information, then when they tell you where they got it, you realize just how mind bogglingly stupid these people actually are.

So which media do you consider fair and balanced?

Good question. Far and few between. Can't think of any news site that is objective.

It’s pretty obvious. I’ve seen some of the “sources” people on here post as citations for their crazy Israel conspiracies.

Very cheap and easy to set up a ‘news’ site these days. I have to wonder though if those behind this recent proliferation have our best interests at heart.

owzer

So which media do you consider fair and balanced?

Good question. Far and few between. Can't think of any news site that is objective.

A few come to mind: The Economist, ProPublica, The Washington Post and The Guardian are all pretty good.

No wonder since they provide an open alternative to the selectively edited news and biased narratives provided on MSM. If its not on X and Tik Tok , it didnt happen, lol.

You are a victim of the problem described in the article.

Bone....the "crazy Israel conspiracies " arent funded by AIPAC , therefore unreliable ?

Just need to listen to Israeli politicians, military heads and public figures from Israel to gauge what their intentions and feelings are.

Not pretty.

South Africa's UN case lists them all.

Those sites include a network of 167 Russian disinformation sites

The news sites pushing Russian disinformation are bad enough, but made worse when those sites allow comments that are not moderated, so many comments on these sites and others are made by individuals that readily accept as true what reasonable people would see is propaganda. I'm using 'reasonable people', the way a Fox News attorney used it to defend blatant lies told by one of Murdoch's entertainers, T. Carlson.

Apologies for dating myself but while in university doing research I was cautioned to not use or limit news outlets as sources. One advisor listed some outlets he might consider acceptable, and as I recall they included, BBC, The Guardian, NY Times, Washington Post, St. Louis Post- Dispatch, and perhaps others I cannot recall, after all, many years ago. This was in the days before cable news. I recall a poster on JT using a site called "Impeach Obama. org." to defend his anti-Obama position, back then there were no sites like that to use as sources. The 'democratization of information' has been a mixed blessing, sometimes a curse, good for propaganda pushers that know many of the audience they're intending to reach are not 'reasonable' people..

I’ve got an idea to pitch to our nation’s adversaries like China or Russia - they should set up fake news sites to introduce Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt to the American public. They could even push fake news and fake polls.

@ericjapan: chaps attacking the right should zip it.

I thought rightists claimed to be believers in something they call 'free speech?

Or....read books.

Just a few days ago, X was found by researchers to be the most full of disinformation compared to all the major social media websites. https://apnews.com/article/disinformation-musk-x-twitter-european-union-9f7823726f812bb357ee4225b884354f

Moscow’s disinformation operation “is a multimillion-euro weapon of mass manipulation aimed both internally at the Russians as well as at Europeans and the rest of the world,” she said at a press briefing in Brussels.

Anyone using social networks for news is a fool. That has been proven over and over, yet some people still think there is no other way to learn "the truth" spouted by non-journalists who don't have any reputation on the line for anything they write.