GOP is making fake news sites to fool low-information voters

[Joe Republic]

Remember earlier this year when the GOP was caught setting up a bunch of fake fundraising sites that at first glance looked like they were supporting various Democratic candidates, but on closer inspection would have seen your donation go directly to their Republican opponents?

They're at it again, but with a new tactic:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

All's fair in love and war.

[Lief 🗽]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure how any adult with an ounce of self-respect can still be a Republican at this point. What an embarrassment.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure how any adult with an ounce of self-respect can still be a Republican at this point. What an embarrassment.

At this point? Is this 2005?

[pbrower2a]

Here's what the "South Michigan Update" has to offer:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So who is behind the "South Michigan Update"?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Enough said. The NRCC would never pay for offering "news" with any pretense of neutrality.

....

Never mind that the incumbent in an R+3 district (vulnerable to a solid opponent if a subpar pol) is a 100% Koch stooge.

MI-07 would be a perfect district for another Gerald Ford, a conservative who can occasion make a principled break with his Party. The Republican Party has created plenty of R+3 or so districts, and the GOP has given every advantage to right-wing hacks like the incumbent in that district.  

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Meanwhile respected news sites, in order to get ad revenue, link to fake news stories that attempt to fool low-information consumers.  A larger trend where so much is being passed for journalism that isn't makes this possible.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Meanwhile respected news sites, in order to get ad revenue, link to fake news stories that attempt to fool low-information consumers.  A larger trend where so much is being passed for journalism that isn't makes this possible.

Let's not forget the world's least lovely trend - journalists copying their stories from f'cking twatter.

[pbrower2a]

Meanwhile respected news sites, in order to get ad revenue, link to fake news stories that attempt to fool low-information consumers.  A larger trend where so much is being passed for journalism that isn't makes this possible.

Let's not forget the world's least lovely trend - journalists copying their stories from f'cking twatter.

Different pattern, but also execrable journalism. It is plagiarism. There's usually no way to verify what is on Twitter. The old standard of journalism was two independent sources followed by fact-checking. Such prevents (or at least deters) hoaxes, fabricated stories, and plagiarism.  Likewise, journalists need to be able to know and identify bias when they see it. When someone communicates the idea that a politician as "just another liberal" or "a right-wing hack", then there is surely some partisan bias. Don't they know the code words?

New technologies make journalism more vulnerable to propaganda, hoaxes, and plagiarism. It takes some wisdom to keep those out of one's journalistic efforts.

 

[GaussLaw]

All's fair in love and war.

[Indy Texas]

Fox News wasn't getting the job done?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

And? This is one of the oldest strategies in the book.