Read all about it: Facts and News edition

No such thing as facts, according to Scottie Nell Hughes:

Ms Hughes has appeared across several media outlets representing President-elect Donald Trump both during the campaign period and after and said much of what Mr Trump tweets is true to a “certain crowd”.

“It is an idea of an opinion. On one hand I hear half the media saying that these are lies but on the other half there are many people who say, no, it’s true,” Ms Hughes said.

“One thing that has been interesting this entire campaign season to watch, is that people that say facts are facts - they’re not really facts.

"Everybody has a way of interpreting them to be the truth or not true. There are no such things, unfortunately, as facts.

“So Mr Trump’s tweets, amongst a certain crowd, a large part of the population, are truth,” she added.

I’m glad she included the “unfortunately” part in that quote. It lets me believe just a little bit that she isn’t completely crazy. That she laments the fact that facts aren’t facts if you don’t believe them to be facts. I think that’s what she’s saying, anyways.

Nah, it was just verbal shorthand for “There are no such things, unfortunately for you, as facts”.

I’d like to give her a contract that has her working for me for a certain amount of money. When the time comes to collect, the facts I interpret will face the facts she interprets and tell them to go pound sound or take 40% less than I promised. I believe this will make me a great deal maker and perhaps our future first lady president.

Interesting article. Sowing distrust. Even prescient. “This is especially easy to imagine under President Trump.” - written in July.

The aim is to promote an atmosphere of uncertainty and paranoia, heightening divisions among its adversaries. “Having realized it is unlikely to make any real or lasting friends, Moscow has instead turned its efforts into paralyzing and demoralizing its enemies,” Galeotti writes.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/804673075325308929

VELES, Macedonia (AP) — On the second floor of a noisy sports center in the Macedonian town of Veles, a teenage purveyor of fake news cracked open his laptop and laid out his case for why lying is more lucrative than the truth.

Real news gets reported everywhere, he argued. Made-up stories are unique.

“The fake news is the good news,” the 18-year-old said, pointing to a graph showing his audience figures, which reached into the hundreds of thousands, a bling watch clasped firmly around his wrist. “A fake news article is way more opened than any other.”

We want to be lied to just as long as these lies confirm what we already know.

Using the web intelligence service Domain Tools, the AP confirmed that the teen is behind more than a dozen different websites, including knockoffs of well-known U.S. media outlets. Typical headlines include “Wow! Queen Elizabeth Invited Trump — This Is A Game Changer” or “BREAKING: What George Soros Just Did Will Leave You SICK!” Both pieces carried untrue or questionable assertions.

A simple Domain Tools search revealed roughly 200 U.S.-oriented news websites registered in Veles, most created within the last 12 months.

For the residents of Veles, a Macedonian rust belt town of 50,000 people with shuttered factories and high unemployment, the thousands of dollars brought in by fake news operations aren’t necessarily unwelcome.

See? Trump is saving jobs from the rust belt. A rust belt, anyways.

Some comments on this article:

https://twitter.com/JFGUNC23/status/804673717037109249
https://twitter.com/NoonMark/status/804673433837703172
https://twitter.com/ImyOWNhandout/status/804673880967315456
https://twitter.com/VictorMurgolo/status/804717032713441280
The last comment is in reference to the picture used by the news story:

Once again.

It’s the only way to be sure.

There’s a brilliance to this statement.

And shockingly true. The fight for unique content for ad revenue took a very wrong turn at some point.

Probably around the point where we stopped valuing it.

I subscribed to my local paper and the Times about two weeks ago, even though I’m not likely to read them much, just to help fund actual journalism. Gotta stop the clicks = money system or this is the inevitable endgame.

I also subscribed to the NYT a few weeks ago, but I rather regret it as their website is terrible. You know you can’t highlight text on the NYT website? The WaPo website is 100X better. I even sent them feedback, but, of course, what do they care? I realize the NYT needs my money more than Bezos, but, I really can’t get over their shitty website. Plus, WaPo has breaking news hours before NYT.

Maybe I’m unclear on what you mean by highlighting text, but I can drag select and copy text no problem:

[quote]Obama and President Xi Jinping of China, it has typically come up after half a dozen more pressing issues, like trade, cyberattacks and Beijing’s aggressive moves in the South China Sea.

Now, though, in a single protocol-shattering phone call with the president of Taiwan,[/quote]

-Tom

https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/805448387495686144

When asked about the allegations on Sunday morning, Pence said he found them “refreshing.”

“Well, it’s his right to express his opinion as president-elect of the United States,” said Pence during an appearance on ABC’s This Week. “I think one of the things that’s refreshing about our president-elect and one of the reasons why I think he made such an incredible connection with people all across this country is because he tells you what’s on his mind.”

This was in response to Trump’s false allegation that millions voted illegally to sway the popular vote to Hillary. He’s not lying. He’s just expressing his opinion.

EDIT: OK, maybe it’s true. Priebus isn’t sure…

https://twitter.com/SopanDeb/status/805446456643584000

Pence’s defense of Trump’s lie matches a longstanding pattern: When the president-elect makes a claim that is obviously indefensible, his surrogates mitigate the damage by arguing it shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Former Trump campaign manager and current CNN contributor Corey Lewandowski said during a public event on Thursday that the media was at fault for taking so many of Trump’s statements literally.

Don’t take Trump seriously. Don’t take what he says literally. Are there going to be disclaimers stating this before every speech he gives, every promise he makes, every deal he negotiates, every State of the Union address?

It’s a Catch 22. It’s an out no matter what the scenario is. Praise him when he’s right or takes action, our fault if he doesn’t because he wasn’t being serious anyway. So the fault lies 100% with everyone except him.

Right, it’s a classic tactic by serial abusers - it’s your fault for being dumb enough to believe him, not his fault for being an awful piece of garbage.

Posted by Dan Rather on his Facebook page:

The reality is we don’t live in a post-truth world because if we did, almost every aspect of modern society would cease to exist - immediately. So the fact that we seem to be heading into that world in politics is not only deeply troubling, it has the potential to upend life as we know it.

A few days ago CNN commentator Scottie Nell Hughes, a Donald Trump surrogate, went on the Diane Rehm Show on NPR and in a panel discussion said of the fact that the President-elect regularly lies “I hear half the media saying that these are lies. But on the other half, there are many people that go, ‘No, it’s true.’ And so one thing that has been interesting this entire campaign season to watch, is that often when people that say facts are facts—they’re not really facts. Everybody has a way—it’s kind of like looking at ratings, or looking at a glass of half-full water. Everybody has a way of interpreting them to be the truth, or not truth. There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore as facts.”

This isn’t just one surrogate talking. This has been the entire thrust behind the Trump campaign and the duplicitous media outlets that have echoed the lies without question.

If people want to live in a post-truth world, where “elite” experts are all biased and facts are up for interpretation, I suggest they go all the way.

You can go to a post-truth doctor who could say “well the elitist scientific tests say you have strep throat but I say it’s cancer so let’s give you some chemotherapy.”

Or you can go to a post-truth electrician who might say “well those elitist electrical manuals published in New York and those government regulations out of Washington say you should ground your electricity, but that’s just a bunch of red tape.”

Or you can go to a post-truth auto mechanic who might say “well those elitist laws of physics say that this is how a braking system works, but let’s replace your brake pads with fresh-baked chocolate chip cookies because they will smell better when you hit the brake pedal.”

The reality is that all of modern society, from the way your cell phone hooks up to your wi-fi, to the way the rain funnels into the storm drain, to the way your freezer keeps your ice cream frozen, is based on facts. It’s because smart people, who went to school and learned facts, collaborated to figure things out. And they wrote them down so that other people would know those facts and be able to build on them. That’s how science works. That’s how technology works. That’s how modernity works.

Now that’s not to say that there aren’t things we don’t understand, or things we have gotten wrong. But that’s the great thing about facts and data. When they disprove something you thought, you can’t - or at least shouldn’t - ignore it. Once again, that’s how progress happens.

The United States has risen to the most powerful and prosperous nation in human history based on facts, an educational system that taught them, a legal system that respected them, and a political system that made it all possible. That is the winning formula for the health and security of our nation, and the world. And if you don’t like facts then I hope you don’t ruin everything for those of us who do.

It’s amazing to me that this has to be said. That people need to be reminded of this very fundamental idea.

The argument Thomas Frank makes - which I think is a bit too sanguine and on the nose personally - is that the post-factual world is partially a result of politically induced schizophrenia, where after decades of being told Big Changes Are Coming yet nothing at all changes even in the slightest, the public just doesn’t believe experts at all, because the experts (in part) don’t actually think the public can actually understand the solutions to the problems they have and deep down are offended they have to waste time explaining to the plebs solutions when they should just be shutting up and getting on board.

Eh.

Some part of it is that when you have imbeciles who don’t respect basic facts, or expertise from trained experts, it becomes absurd for the experts to argue their position.

Like during the election, we had guys with decades of experience in foreign and domestic policy arguing with idiots like Sean Hannity who lack even a bachelor’s degree, and there was a suggestion of parity between the positions. That some random imbecile’s ideas are somehow of equal value to a guy with immense experience and education in a given field.

Their response to detailed arguments was like some worthless hippy, “Yeah well, that’s just like, your opinion, man.”

Where Trump gets his news, as judged by his tweets.

That seems like a less sophisticated analysis than I’d thought, just parsing through the links. I thought it might have been a cross reference against news sources that reported the things that he tweeted about. I.e. if Breitbart posted a news story, then he tweeted on the topic (even without a link) shortly thereafter.

Actually, since I don’t know what proportion of his tweets include links, I don’t know if that analysis would be substantially different from the one they ran.

It also does not include a sentiment analysis, whether the link from NYT was talked about positively or negatively.