i dont like or trust the leader of the free world but does he have a point? The bbc certainly does publish fake news.. even the basic stories are inaccurate fake

last week i saw how 5500 had ridden the steam train over three days onthe settle carlise and the bbc reported this is a big passenegr numbers boost..although on average the line would normally carry 10000over the same three days..

today they are reporting that roads are congested because of the rise in online shopping.. based on my own facts i havent been intoa tescofor a couple of years but that nice van visitsmineandhalfadozenfolks inour street every week..surely reducing traffic movements not increasing them?

last week i saw how 5500 had ridden the steam train over three days onthe settle carlise and the bbc reported this is a big passenegr numbers boost..although on average the line would normally carry 10000over the same three days..

Go on then

even the basic stories are inaccurate fake

Whats fake about the story?

today they are reporting that roads are congested because of the rise in online shopping.. based on my own facts i havent been intoa tescofor a couple of years but that nice van visitsmineandhalfadozenfolks inour street every week..surely reducing traffic movements not increasing them?

Do you mean you don’t understand the connection?

The BBC have been telling me for weeks that some Alan Sugar wannabe is President of the USA, clearly not a trustworthy source of factual information.

Do you mean you don’t understand the connection?

Why not explain it then, rather than just post a snide comment about your superior grasp on things……

I think a definition of what fake news is needed.

Fake news was originally coined to describe completely fabricated happenings.

The term seems to now be used to describe any story someone doesn’t agree with.

If we apply to the term fake news to any story that carries bias or inaccuracies then it’s all fake.

Maybe Baudrillard was right?

last week i saw how 5500 had ridden the steam train over three days onthe settle carlise and the bbc reported this is a big passenegr numbers boost..although on average the line would normally carry 10000over the same three days..

Well…did the steam train replace all scheduled services, or just a few of them? I think it might struggle to replace more than half of them, given that two trains normally run simulataneously on that service.

The scheduled service thing was a bit of red herring, given you had to pre-book seats on it and they were also running a replacement bus service for the poor locals who would otherwise turned up and found it full up with trainspotters.

Luckily I checked before riding from Skipton to Settle that day!

Obviously, I’m failing to see the hidden political agenda behind #fakenews about a steam service. 🙂

Sorry, but there must be better examples than passenger numbers on a steam train.

Why not explain it then, rather than just post a snide comment about your superior grasp on things……

Plus one

Why not explain it then, rather than just post a snide comment about your superior grasp on things……

Ok on the train thing 5,500 people rode the line in 3 days. Fact? Yes they most likely counted them. 10,000 in total – did steam replace all of the trains? Was this in addition to all the other services?
Online shopping and congestion – well your one man annicdote doesn’t make the news fact or not. Hypotheticals, people shop more online meaning more postal deliveries, the big retailers of old would get a well packed delivery efficiently taken to their store then people would make a trip to shop and probably buy a number of things from each retailer, now it goes to a DC that then ships via a more fragmented delivery system to a huge number of places (the previous postal delivery would be the postman and a number of couriers) now you have multiple couriers cris crossing each other to do multiple deliveries to the same places – Amazon/Ebay/Whatever else send from multiple locations in multiple parcels increasing the transport requirements. The ease and concienance of low/free shipping and free returns means more individual packages are now flowing back and forward to lots of new retail destinations.

That make any sense?

and to add the “snide” comment was probably as you had made zero effort to work it out, claimed the BBC were creating fake news (what’s the adgenda for that?) and dismissed the second story out of hand because you used tesco online.

It is the current buzz word, and it’s **** ridiculous.

What’s your super credible source OP?

last week i saw how 5500 had ridden the steam train over three days onthe settle carlise and the bbc reported this is a big passenegr numbers boost..although on average the line would normally carry 10000over the same three days..

Maybe they would over a full day on the entire route, but Tornado didn’t operate a full day (12 services) and the whole route isn’t open (only Appleby to Skipton). Appleby station had 53,000 entries and exits in the whole of 2015/16 reporting period, so 5,500 in 3 February days sounds like some fairly hefty growth to me. Did you see the pictures too? I can assure you that’s a touch busier than it usually is.

Data taken from the Office of Rail Regulation estimates here.

As for the online shopping, WTF?

What’s your super credible source OP?

OP cited his source, in fairness. It was:

based on my own facts i havent been intoa tescofor a couple of years but that nice van visitsmineandhalfadozenfolks inour street every week..surely reducing traffic movements not increasing them?

Checkmate, BBC.

🙂

BBC are saying today that we all spend an average of 32 hours sitting in traffic a year.

Poppycock. I’ve never had any problem getting around Skipton. #fakenews

It’s just part of the Libtard conspiracy to get us out of our cars.

I seem to recall during indyref the bbc news stated that to stay in the EU could only be acheived if we voted no…..

Err…..

It’s not so false news as being simplified to fit in the time available.
The train passenger number thing above. Much quicker to give a number and single sentence explanation instead of what appears to be the true story explained above.

Fake news, alternative facts, all excuses to tell yourself so that you don’t have to listen to the other side’s argument.

Diplomacy and debate are dead in the age of the Internet. extremely polarised views from the echo chamber are your reality now.

I quite possibly spent 32 hours sitting in traffic just in January – clearly it’s fakenews.
Every news provider has an agenda of some description- but Trump Bannon appears to have a completely different approach to news, or truth.

I don’t think the BBC does fake news, but it does pretty poor reporting these days. To be fair the organisation has been treated pretty badly by subsequent governments, since the Dr David Kelly affair, but it has laid down with a whimper to take its beatings rather than fight for it’s integrity and honesty. And of course the political influence of Murdoch has seen further restrictions placed on its news funding. Now it largely just passes on press releases, as a news organisation it has become devoid of any investigation or digging into the truth behind those pr soundbites.

It is a bad time for investigative journalism all round though, the internet and 24 hour news channels have changed the landscape, organisations are struggling to monetise content and fund proper investigative journalism. Entertainment disguised as news is the order of the day, but democracy suffers because the expected checks and balances on power are missing.

Have you ever read a news article about the industry you work in?

Whenever a mainstream news source reports on the area I work in, the over simplification and ignorance makes the actual “facts” reported ropey at best.

Entertainment disguised as news is the order of the day, but democracy suffers because the expected checks and balances on power are missing.

At this point I would have to suggest watching things like Spotlight & the Fith Estate – It’s what journalism looks like and it’s what it’s there for. The other one would be http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/ for a reminder.

gobuchul – Member
Have you ever read a news article about the industry you work in?

It’s not just where you work, it’s almost any subject if you happen to know a lot about it. Once you realise how badly wrong they can get it (whether that’s through over-simplification, complete mis-understanding or just bias) you can only call into question their other reports too.

Here’s the Tornado article.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-39020181

Unless there’s another there is no mention of passenger boosts.

There was a independent credibility study of various press organisations made recently – which I just can’t find a link for now.

It not only fact-checked reported stories but considered how they reported various facts and ignored others etc to give each story a right or left spin.

The BBC was one of, if not the most credible and stright down the line agencies.

There are people who think they’re a bunch of leftie propaganda spewers, but I guess if you think The Mail or the Sun is credible the BBC is going to look like Spin and Lies (aka Fake news).

I had wondered if they’d gone too far with reporting Trump’s most recent lie about a terrorist attack in Sweden that just didn’t happen – I assumed he misspoke and meant Sehwan in Pakistan and they were making more of it than they should, but no it seems his clarification was he was talking about a completely fabricated story Fox News had reported. I guess that’s a pretty damming indication of the problem with ‘fake’ news, when policy makers start to believe it.

He should probably spend more time listening to security Briefings rather than watching the US version of The Express.

The other one would be http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/ for a reminder.

The MP’s expenses is an excellent example, the person who had the information was struggling to get any news organisation to take it up, it was only when the rumours spread beyond the traditional media that it was eventually picked up.

Have you ever read a news article about the industry you work in?

Whenever a mainstream news source reports on the area I work in, the over simplification and ignorance makes the actual “facts” reported ropey at best.

I work in government. Possibly the one area the news generally does a reasonable job of 😀

Nobody should be taking anything printed or published in the media as FACT. It is just a point of view expressed, maybe with one or two supporting facts often cherry-picked by the journalist to maximise the impact/appeal/shock of the story to sell more copies. But what it isn’t is a full and thorough impartial investigation into the facts. And often with complex issues even when presented with the facts, the facts alone don’t necessarily provide a definitive answer, they just inform individuals to form their own opinions.

It’s quite worrying that the leader of the free world is using the media and a source of information that is forming his opinions on anything.

‘Fake news’ should be reserved for the real dangerous stuff. An awful lot of news probably seems ‘fake’ if you spent 3 seconds thinking about it and comparing it with what you can see out of your window right now.

I’m personally pretty happy that most of the objective facts I read on the BBC (or any of the reputable news outlets in the UK) are accurate as far as they go. For example if they say there were 5500 passengers on the steam train then I’m sure that’s how many there were.
Some are obviously more subjective but that doesn’t make them fake either. IMO that’s clearly different from saying an event happened when it didn’t.

It’s not Tesco, it’s people ordering toilet rolls etc from Amazon and then appallingly wasteful packaging being used to deliver them.

I ordered eight small foam tiles for my turbo trainer to sit on and despite being only a foot square they came in boxes taller and wider than me, on their own van on a special delivery run.

I now have to take all that cardboard to the recycling centre, making another vehicle on the road.

MrSalmon – Member
‘Fake news’ should be reserved for the real dangerous stuff. An awful lot of news probably seems ‘fake’ if you spent 3 seconds thinking about it and comparing it with what you can see out of your window right now.

and what goes with that is being able to admit you were mistaken or minsinformed if you must.

The whole ‘fake news’ phenomenon is fascinating not least because it’s hardly a new thing; it’s been happening for years if you take the definition as being the misrepresenting of information in order to support a political or social agenda (which I personally think it should mean). It’s the difference between reporting the Trump administration’s ‘ban on Muslims’ versus the Trump administration’s ‘ban on travel from predominantly Muslim countries’. The difference in the reporting is subtle but in the evaluation, subsequent interpretation and then consequently what people choose to believe, it’s huge.

There was a huge increase in train traffic through settle, that’s for sure. Quoted figure for daily passengers might include somewhere well down the south end of the line.

I understood fake news to be “propoganda” or totally rubbish or “versions” of a story ie alternative facts… Not dull pieces of reportage

and with everything try applying these thoughts
Why are they telling me this
What do they want me to think after
Is there any basis in fact….

It seems like its a lot easier to pass off fake news nowadays as the proper news itself is so utterly unhinged! Things which would have sounded absurd a few years ago, we now just shrug at and think… meh.

Lets be honest, if a news piece came up right now saying that Trump has just annexed Canada, and nuked Iran, would you believe it?

Good example on the BBC right now. Headline is ‘Trump tries to clarify Sweden remarks’.
The headline could read ‘Trump clarifies Sweden remarks’, which is a bit more generous. The fact that he’s provided some sort of explanation doesn’t seem to be in doubt, so in my view this isn’t ‘fake news’ but there is a bit of bias in how it’s reported.

Headline is ‘Trump tries to clarify Sweden remarks’.
The headline could read ‘Trump clarifies Sweden remarks’, which is a bit more generous.

Tries to clarify is very generous for somebody who fails to clarify anything beyond I saw it on’t telly box last night it were right realistic them drones saying exterminate like

The headline could read ‘Trump clarifies Sweden remarks’, which is a bit more generous.

Although reading the story because he used Twitter he wasn’t able to provide complete clarity on what he meant and someone else had to try and chip in from the White House to further clarify his clarification.

I think ‘Trump tries to clarify’ is about right.

Tries to clarify is very generous for somebody who fails to clarify anything beyond I saw it on’t telly box last night it were right realistic them drones saying exterminate like

I’d agree, but I meant that, say, Fox news (or somebody else a bit more sympathetic to Trump) could paint it that way based on the same facts.

Theres a reason Blair, Dave etc courted Rupert Murdoch and the media. because they’re not stupid.

You can’t go on the attack against ‘The Media’, lumping them all in together, while slagging them off, then expect to get an unbiased appraisal of your actions.

It may not be right, and they are too powerful, but thats just the way it is. Apparently even Fox News is feeling aggrieved about its treatment from Trump. I think that serves as a compass to how far through the looking glass we now are, where Fox News is considered hostile. And this paranoia is just going to get worse.

With this ‘us and them’ narrative being played out, as a cynical (and clueless) political tool, I’ll give it a month before some redneck shitkicker kills a journalist!

The BBC ties itself up in knots trying to be “balanced” and certainly there’s a strong argument that it didn’t challenge the Brexit BS enough, not that it would have made much difference when the vote was won on racism.

I don’t know WTF you are on about OP, but it’s not “fake news” as I understand it. Please have a Google and find out what the term really means.

I’d agree, but I meant that, say, Fox news (or somebody else a bit more sympathetic to Trump) could paint it that way based on the same facts.

Donald J. Trump ?@realDonaldTrump 14h14 hours ago
More
My statement as to what’s happening in Sweden was in reference to a story that was broadcast on @FoxNews concerning immigrants & Sweden.

Which story, when, who presented it, got a link? Got an idea what it was actually saying? Was it relevant?

I think a 10 year old would get a tries for that one…