Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
By silveristhenew (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Zero Hedge Targeted On Liberal Professor’s List of “Fake News” Sources

Wednesday, November 16, 2016 17:31
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

We have a confession to make, everything we've said over the past ~7 years has been fake.  Well, not really, but that's what the ultra-liberal, Assistant Professor of Communications at Merrimack College, Melissa “Mish” Zimdars, would like for you to believe.

Melissa Zimbars

While it's unclear exactly what prompted Zimdars to publish a list of “fake news” sources, we have a sneaking suspicion it was a coping mechnism cleverly employed by the New England, liberal arts snowflake to deal with the stunning defeat of her chosen Presidential candidate.  Or, perhaps she was simply trying to help the folks at Google and Facebook who have vowed to censor “fake news” sources by cutting off their access to advertising.

But, no matter the reason, below is the full list of information resources that Zimdars, the ultimate arbiter of credibility, has deemed “fake.”  Notice that while the list includes numerous conservative news sources like Breitbart, Infowars, Twitchy, The Blaze and Bizpac Review, it excludes the beacon of impartiality known as The Huffington Post.

Moreover, Zimdars even provided the following helpful categorization guidelines to help you determine the level of “fakeness” exhibited by each site.  Zero Hedge has not yet been assigned a category, which we find kind of hurtful.

CATEGORY 1: Below is a list of fake, false, or regularly misleading websites that are shared on Facebook and social media. Some of these websites may rely on “outrage” by using distorted headlines and decontextualized or dubious information in order to generate likes, shares, and profits. These websites are categorized with the number 1 next to them.

CATEGORY 2: Some websites on this list may circulate misleading and/or potentially unreliable information, and they are marked with a 2.

CATEGORY 3: Other websites on this list sometimes use clickbait-y headlines and social media descriptions, and they are marked with a 3.

CATEGORY 4: Other sources on this list are purposefully fake with the intent of satire/comedy, which can offer important critical commentary on politics and society, but have the potential to be shared as actual/literal news. I’m including them here, for now, because 1.) they have the potential to perpetuate misinformation based on different audience (mis)interpretations and 2.) to make sure anyone who reads a story by The Onion, for example, understands its purpose. If you think this is unnecessary, please see Literally Unbelievable.

Fake News

Fake News

Perhaps Zimdars missed this John Podesta email exposing Arianna Huffington blatantly colluding with the Hillary campaign to “echo their message without any perceived conflicts.”  Or, maybe this was just dismissed as useless Russian propaganda?

“She is enthusiastic abt the project but asks if she's more useful to us not being on the Board and, instead, using Huffpo to echo our message without any perceived conflicts. She has a point.”

HuffPo

In any event, the ever helpful Zimdars also provides the following “tips for analyzing news sources”:

Avoid websites that end in “lo” ex: Newslo (above). These sites take pieces of accurate information and then packaging that information with other false or misleading “facts” (sometimes for the purposes of satire or comedy).

Watch out for websites that end in “.com.co” as they are often fake versions of real news sources

Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not also reporting on the story. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result of corporate media bias and other factors, but there should typically be more than one source reporting on a topic or event.

Odd domain names generally equal odd and rarely truthful news.

Lack of author attribution may, but not always, signify that the news story is suspect and requires verification.

Some news organizations are also letting bloggers post under the banner of particular news brands; however, many of these posts do not go through the same editing process (ex: BuzzFeed Community Posts, Kinja blogs, Forbes blogs).

Check the “About Us” tab on websites or look up the website on Snopes or Wikipedia for more information about the source.

Bad web design and use of ALL CAPS can also be a sign that the source you’re looking at should be verified and/or read in conjunction with other sources.

If the story makes you REALLY ANGRY it’s probably a good idea to keep reading about the topic via other sources to make sure the story you read wasn’t purposefully trying to make you angry (with potentially misleading or false information) in order to generate shares and ad revenue.

While we suspect that Zimdars doesn't understand half of what we write and objected to our factual coverage of the WikiLeaks emails along with Hillary's FBI investigation and many other scandals, we welcome her readership to the extent she ever wishes to expand her chosen sources of enlightenment beyond the Rachel Maddow Show.

Finally, we leave it to @MattTturner4L to perfectly summ up the hypocrisy…

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Total 1 comment
  • WOW
    How about we ban(not really but as a liberal way to deal with reality) weaponized news:
    AB NB C B(ull).S(hit). FOX trotting a devilsh concoction.
    These cogs in the M.I.C. machine will sell you
    War in any middle eastern country war with russia war war WAR
    and make money on the flip side when they sell weapons to the countries they bomb or the orwellian new allies they make.
    They will also sell you on the dangers of diseases like h1n1 or zika or (insert “scary name here”)
    and company ties will sell(or make government buy) their antidotes to the poision they are pushing
    They will poo-poo natural medicinal choices but are quick to sell ad space for all things pharmaceutical

    So for loony liberals who are all about “diversity” Diversity of THOUGHT is a no-no

    an idea for google/facebook/twitter would be to color code the news source
    Blue left leaning Red right leaning -Black independent – green satire?
    Leave it up to the news source to tag their material properly or face time penalties

    If you are business minded and see Trump supporters as pro free speech advocates, there’s 60 million future customers hungry for alternative sources.

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.