[markomalley]

So a fake news article about fake news.

Cool.

[Savage Rider]

Sorry, but Fake News doesn’t get to define fake news. The Washington Post never even heard about Fake News until Donald Trump came along.

[z3n]

They’re on the ropes. Full defense.

“I’M NOT A LIAR”

Keep the message on the lies. Don’t let them off the hook

[rightwingcrazy]

How they phrased the poll question is left to the imagination. Perhaps all this means is that what the pollsters consider to be “accurate news stories” is not considered accurate by others.

[Brilliant]

Who judges that? The WaPo? Please.

[BenLurkin]

If the “accurate” article says that the Donald eats Big Macs, or had two scoops of ice cream, then yes, it is fake “news”

[stockpirate]

This is an example of a fake news story.

[Sacajaweau]

Except "accurate" based on "feelings" is likely still fake news...

It's like Comey's memos and his testimony..."He felt...."

[teeman8r]

accurate can be fake:

a dem and a repub have a race.

the dem comes in second, the repub, next to last.

accurate, but fake.

[rjsimmon]

Even were this to be correct, which is dubious given the source, did they do a similar study to see how many Democrats believe a story (regardless of its veracity) that portrayed the POTUS or any Republican in a negative light simply because of its source?

If not, then the news agency is perpetuating “fake news”.

[Beowulf9]

[Migraine]

There’s a big difference between saying “Trump will no doubt play up the size of this crowd despite the empty seats (show picture of auditorium before it was full). That’s just the way Trump is — a narcissist, according to several reputable psychiatrists.”

Versus saying, “No individual since Dr. Martin Luther King, or maybe the charismatic Sarah Palin, has been able to consistently raise such crowds, especially with only short notice.”

Both characterizations could conceivably be used to describe the same event; and we KNOW which one the lamestreams consistently employ.

THAT’S what we are calling “fake news”.

I know it hurts their prissy little feelings; sorry Charlie. Cry me a river.

[mountainlion]

The demonicrats love situational ethics. It just occurred to me that fake news is situational news.

[tumblindice]

THE 2004 CAMPAIGN: NATIONAL GUARD; Memos on Bush Are Fake But Accurate, Typist Says
Shades of Gunga Dan. This is a special kind of doublethink.
They know something is false, but it is also true.

[PTBAA]

“Sure I lied to you many time in the past, but this time I’m telling the truth!”

[WayneS]

The premise of the poll is flawed.

An accurate news story is neither positive nor negative, it is simply factual correct.

If a journalist were to ctually write a truly factual news story, then I am grown up enough to accept it, even if I personally consider it “bad news”.

Hints for writing factual NEWS articles (not applicable to opinion pieces which are clearly labeled as such):

1) The number of adjectives used in your article should be as close to zero as possible.
2) No more than, say, 5% of the factual content of any story should be from “anonymous sources”.
3) If you are going to include the opinions of individuals in a particular news story, be sure to clearly indicate that the information provided by such individuals is, in fact, opinion(s).
4) Make sure your interviews seeking opinions on an issue are split about 50-50 (max 60-40) between those on both sides of the issue.
4) Never, and I mean NEVER, allow the writer to imply, state or otherwise inject his/her personal opinion(s) in to a factual news story.
5) In a factual news article, never, and I mean NEVER, speculate about the “meaning” of a particular story.

[IronJack]

Define “accurate.”

[kaehurowing]

At this point, virtually everything from WaPo, NY Times, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, Reuters and other is fake news.

[rockrr]

That you (wapo) believe this trips says more about you than it does about us...

[stylin19a]

reading the survey now.

some gems:
First, the survey sponsors:
"The research reported here is based on a nationally representative mail survey of more than 19,000 U.S. adults aged 18 and older. This project received support from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Open Society Foundations."

seems to me, any comparison prior to the advent of the World Wide Web would not be valid, yet here's this:
IN 1989, 25% OF U.S. ADULTS SAID THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF POLITICAL BIAS IN NEWS COVERAGE; NOW, 45% DO.

The Methodology does not show party breakdown. You have to contact gallup for that.
hilights:
Results are based on self-administered mail surveys with a random sample of 19,196 U.S. adults, aged 18 and older. Gallup used a random, addressed-based sample of 109,962 U.S. households in all 50 states...
The computed response rate for valid surveys was 20%...
Gallup weighted the obtained sample to correct for unequal selection probability and nonresponse. Nonresponse adjustments were made by adjusting the sample to match the national demographics of gender, age, race,Hispanic ethnicity, education, region and population density