Hi,
@ryanbr (fanboy) just created a new adblock list which is intended to block fake news sites.
Targeting sites with Hoax, propanganda and clickbait (fake sites)
Could you please add it to the regular uBO subscriptions lists?
source: https://forums.lanik.us/viewtopic.php?p=111302
Best,
M.
smed79
All 6 comments
I dont think this list should be added. It would be completely unfitting because all the other lists that have been added to the subscriptions list are about trackers/malware/ads and then suddenly a list with websites that someone feels are fake news ? Just doesnt fit.
Also: who can really objectively decide what is fake news and what not ?
If youre not all-knowing you cant.
sdfasdfgawe456h4356
on 5 Jan 2017
Personally I don't care what "sdfasdfgawe456h4356" thinks of it.
Also: who can really objectively decide what is fake news and what not ?
! Sources: http://fakenewswatch.com/
! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites
! https://docs.google.com/document/d/10eA5-mCZLSS4MQY5QGb5ewC3VAL6pLkT53V_81ZyitM/preview
thx. come again.
ryanbr
on 6 Jan 2017
I did not decline because of @sdfasdfgawe456h4356's comment, I declined for my own reasons. There are the obvious nonsense sites, but there is subjectivity involved in adding or _not_ adding some sites to such list[1]. There are always been "fake news" (somehow it's a trendy expression now as if it's a new thing). My view is that the cure is critical thinking, not a ready-to-use list in uBO. Whoever still want to use it can just import it as any other list.
[1] Example, why is The Guardian not there? Here is a citation.
gorhill
on 6 Jan 2017
@ryanbr thank you very much for your input but there is no reason to get upset :)
the lists you linked are maintained by humans too... who are (like everyone is) fallible and biased
as are of course all the people behind every news site
granted some seem to do a better job than others but even that is just an opinion and everyone is free to disagree with me in fact i encourage it
have a nice day :)
sdfasdfgawe456h4356
on 6 Jan 2017
Is this _fake news_ list officially verified by the Ministry of Truth?
If not, I support the decision to decline this suggestion.
Hrxn
on 6 Jan 2017
Exactly, this whole "Only CNN is telling us the truth" thing needs to stop. It's a joke, nobody still trusts them, and they are running wild screaming. We all know we can't trust the mainstream media, thank goodness we still have alternative media.
(And no, it weren't the Russians that elected Trump, it were the American people who became sick of this "We are good & they are bad" madness.)
@ryanbr, perhaps you can include the sources who are referenced here also ? What about Wikileaks, RT, Glenn Greenwald, ...... ? It's an endless cycle, trying to mouthshut the alternative won't kill it, it will only empower it, perhaps it's time to head out for a mirror instead of blaming another ?
Or what about CNN itself ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lo2jQhjV5w
Betsy25
on 6 Jan 2017
Related issues
RoxKilly
路
4Comments
Darkspirit
路
4Comments
Gitoffthelawn
路
3Comments
ghost
路
3Comments
butonic
路
3Comments
Most helpful comment
I did not decline because of @sdfasdfgawe456h4356's comment, I declined for my own reasons. There are the obvious nonsense sites, but there is subjectivity involved in adding or _not_ adding some sites to such list[1]. There are always been "fake news" (somehow it's a trendy expression now as if it's a new thing). My view is that the cure is critical thinking, not a ready-to-use list in uBO. Whoever still want to use it can just import it as any other list.
[1] Example, why is The Guardian not there? Here is a citation.