Poll of the Day > Conservative propaganda network posing as local news across US

(+) Yeah! (+)

Described as a network of over 1000 "local news" websites, covering every state in the US. Conservative donors give money to request slanted coverage of desired topics. The fact these stories are paid for is not disclosed to readers; instead, the intended story (which at this point is essentially a paid-for ad) is outsourced to freelance writers, and posted under fake names, portrayed as legitimate, bias-free independent journalism in "local news."

These stories are purposely written to provide a sympathetic view of conservative perspectives and politicians, while being critical of the left.

How do you feel about the deceptive practice of passing off paid-for slanted coverage as locally sourced journalism?

NYTimes article:
As Local News Dies, a Pay-for-Play Network Rises in Its Place: https://nyti.ms/349RruY


---

I thought everyone knew this since this was caused the creation of the NPC meme

---

But I thought... Fake news?...

---

Lokarin posted...

I thought everyone knew this since this was caused the creation of the NPC meme

Lok you need to take it easy with posts like this that are just 100% incorrect and not even on topic

---

Duh

---

Mead posted...

Lok you need to take it easy with posts like this that are just 100% incorrect and not even on topic

Isn't this related to the Sinclair network?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fHfgU8oMSo

---

Lokarin posted...

Isn't this related to the Sinclair network?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fHfgU8oMSo

no, this is not related to that

---

Clench281 posted...

NYTimes article:
As Local News Dies, a Pay-for-Play Network Rises in Its Place: https://nyti.ms/349RruY

Paywalled, but it's NYT so odds are it's probably fake news designed to undermine the legitimacy of non-liberal news outlets which has kinda been the NYT's agenda in recent years. NYT lost any pretense of non-partisanship when it ran that editorial ouster a while back.

And just posting a link to a paywalled article while not even posting *any* part of the article itself is something of a similar move on your part.

---

Clench281 posted...

no, this is not related to that

ok, my bad

---

Zeus posted...

Paywalled, but it's NYT so odds are it's probably fake news designed to undermine the legitimacy of non-liberal news outlets which has kinda been the NYT's agenda in recent years. NYT lost any pretense of non-partisanship when it ran that editorial ouster a while back.

And just posting a link to a paywalled article while not even posting *any* part of the article itself is something of a similar move on your part.

It's a long form article. There really isn't a snappy summary to share. So, I provided a synopsis myself. Maybe I do take for granted that I have an NYTimes subscription; though if I didn't I probably would have just pulled it up on archive.org. Took about 15 seconds to find (though graphics are mostly broken) https://web.archive.org/web/20201026020822/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/technology/timpone-local-news-metric-media.html

You can also listen about it for free on their most recent podcast episode titled "A Partisan Future for Local News?"

---

Zeus would rather avoid fake news bullshit.

---

kind9 posted...

Zeus would rather avoid fake news bullshit.

I don't know if we would necessarily call the conservative network "fake news" as the term is typically used, because there isn't necessarily any direct lies being told as much as omissions of details... More of a misleading practice intended to manipulate readers.

---

Clench281 posted...

I don't know if we would necessarily call the conservative network "fake news" as the term is typically used, because there isn't necessarily any direct lies being told as much as omissions of details... More of a misleading practice intended to manipulate readers.

Thats still lying

---

I glanced at it. The article mentions it's a bipartisan issue, although the highlighted company is larger than a lot of the other guys doing it... granted, the NYT's metrics for size are potentially misleading because it's specifically looking the number of sites without any consideration for the size or influence of the sites in question.

The complaint is basically about more credible-looking alt-news, on the grounds that it's deceiving people into thinking these outlets carry more authority than they do while also hiding the fact that they're sometimes paid to make certain claims. Some of the elements sound more controversial or unusual than they are (such as editors asking journalists to write puff pieces on certain subjects or slanting the direction of a story).

Then there's a long profile piece on the creator of that one network, which goes into some of the practical elements like the fact that -- in some cases -- his publications convey public information to readers in smaller communities via automated systems (where the question of bias is less a problem).

Honestly, the kinda bigger issue isn't the reach that it has directly to readers -- who should scrutinize stuff like that -- but instead news organizations who use that reporting for the basis of their work. My NPR affiliate frequently has representatives from supposedly "independent" publications like CTNewsJunkie who might be on the take and receiving a degree of credibility by funneling their content through a larger name like NPR.

---