Deliberately fabricated stories posing as journalism with the aim of manipulating readers is not a new thing. It is a proess which was mastered by President Lyndon Johnson and even Richard Nixon survived prosecution for murder and treason because fake news dominates. If you don't get it, stop reading or do some research beyond the "school textbook" feed. In the meantime, if you read the following, you will at least learn what fake news is.

Let's start with the basics. Most sentences you hear or read are merely an interpretation of something you understand. The knowledge behind them is entirely unique. No two people ever share a precise understanding about what is said or heard. Consequently, consensus should not be an easy endgame until genuine understanding has been secured.

Communication should not be about consistent "messaging" as the media repeatedly asserts to describe the so called "ideal" functioning White House. Democracy is messy. It should bloody idiots, not people who dissent. It is very easy to get it wrong and to pretend that we know what we are doing because openness, arbitrariness and discreteness are all universal aspects of human language and genuine understanding about anything is very difficult to secure.

For example, "messaging" lead almost everybody in the media and in politics (99 percent) to universally swoon and to declare that President Donald Trump had acted presidential for doing the exact opposite of what Obama did in Syria -exercise reasonable restraint.

As we all know or should know, the "red line" that "American intelligence" has drawn is supposed to excuse any attack because Assad allegedly gasses his own people whenever we need an excuse to launch a military attack against him. That is called a "false flag" but let us assume that "American Intelligence" is correct, for argument's sake.

In 2013, when Assad had allegedly gassed his people significanly worse than recently, Obama was criticized for failing to attack the Assad regime. What's the point? It is not the gas that Assad s is allegedly using which is responsible for the carnage in Syria, it is bloody civil war, and in that context, the obsession to manufacture a firm moral conviction to justify dropping bombs in Syria is simply irresponsible, extremely dangerous and ultimately repugnant.

If the media praises Donald Trump when he does the wrong thing, is it not fake in at least that regard?

The reliability of a statement is supposed to inspire confidence through an analysis and understanding of the knowledge behind it. CNN frequently seeks to force consensus by sellecting pundits who are asked to respond to leading questions to confirm clear and obvious biases. President Trump calls this "fake news" and that is exactly what it frequently is.

For example, if we listen to the media we are all supposed to believe that the Russians are the greatest threat to our democracy because, while they failed to tamper with the outcome of the presidential election, they are still trying. It is difficult to in fact comprehend that nonsense or those who believe it.

Consensus based on misinformation is phony and dangerous. In fact, invariant meaning should be rare because there is no relationship between identification and discrimination. It is consequently not unusual for understanding to vary. Moreover, knowledge and individual experience also influences perception and that is a variation that also needs to be analyzed to inspire genuine understanding.



Robin Williams and his daughter

Donate to support the simple truth,
we always strive to be reliable.


You can't take it with you, so be
generous if you can, do not
donate if you can't...