Not quite what I meant about identifying content but fair point.

As for fake news, the most reliable way to tell is whether the piece states information as verifiable fact, and if that fact is verified. Basically, there should be at least some sort of verifiable info in the article, or else it's just narrative. While one side's take may be "real" to half the world, the other side's take can be "real" to the other half of the world, but there should be some piece of actual information that both sides look at and agree is real.

That means if you have an investigative reporter with non-public sources, that's fake news because the other side has no access to his non-public sources?

1lmn3yVerified by whom? There is a long history of "facts verified by official sources" turning out to be false.

Open thread, Apr. 10 - Apr. 16, 2017

by MrMind 1 min read11th Apr 2017124 comments

2


If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post, then it goes here.


Notes for future OT posters:

1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.

2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)

3. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.

4. Unflag the two options "Notify me of new top level comments on this article" and "