La dénonciation des « fake news » se révèle très utile pour les régimes autoritaires

… pour les régimes autoritaires

#no_comment

L’expression appropriée est je crois « #mise_en_abime ».

naaan, ils se moquent de nous là ? Seulement pour les régimes autoritaires ? l’auteur n’est pas au courant du Decodex qui met à l’index les mauvais médias et érigent les autres en bons, ou moyens, excellent ?

Vite, un projet Google pour l’innovation dans la Presse, afin que les gens de Decodex, ils nous sortent un décodeur de fake fake news !

Trump Didn’t Teach Foreign Regimes to Cry ‘Fake News’–Corporate Media Did | FAIR
▻http://fair.org/home/trump-didnt-teach-foreign-regimes-to-cry-fake-news-corporate-media-did

At no point was anyone compelled to define or limit the scope of the phenomenon; from the beginning, one could add something to the category simply by calling it so. That demagogues like Trump, and foreign governments looking to stifle dissent, would use this already malleable and abused term to serve their own ends was completely predictable. (After all, governments around the world took the word “terrorism” and ran with it in much the same way.)

Obviously, there is a notable power asymmetry between the Washington Post and other US news outlets, on the one hand, and the president of the United States; but noting who loosened the ideological pickle jar is an important piece of context as large corporations and governments are now deploying the term to justify regulation of content. Perhaps if major news outlets had bothered to define—and use—the term “fake news” in a semi-coherent fashion, it could have made its exploitation by reactionary forces that much less likely.