Posted on 12/10/2016 7:29:57 AM PST by Kaslin
I think pushing the sexual assault charges (particularly the woman who said she was assualted by Trump at 13 years of age) qualifies as fake news.
The NDAA of 2012 authorized propaganda use against American citizens.
The renewal authorizes control of outside sources,http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3503030/posts, we no longer have a free press.
We no longer will have the ability to seek out truth-telling sources.
I keep reposting this as it seems many of us have missed the links and pieces of the puzzle. Our information access has now been denied.
What two markets are those copies from?
How about “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”?
Yes it’s Snopes, but their explanation holds water, as I knew the two vs. four dots meant something:
http://www.snopes.com/wsj-different-trump-headlines/
Still, your point is valid in that we are being played, even if these images aren’t the best examples. Just look at anything from the AP or WaPo if you want to see manipulation of the news to suit the publisher’s political agenda.
I don’t know. I got this email from an Mid West in law.
What were the different markets.
Sure, there are endless examples of newspapers and media outlets lying and propagandizing. Not trying to say the Rice thing was unquestionably “first” but to my mind, it was the first time a senior national official was sent out to deliver a known fake made-up fabricated totally untrue story in order to deceive the public and cover up the incompetence of even higher level officials, namely Obama and Clinton.
That rises above the normal media spin and BS and in my mind represents the origin of “fake news” as a tool of the regime.
early vs late edition. The edition on the left was published after Trump met with Mexican president Enrique Peña Nieto early in the day (and referenced the seemingly cooperative tone of their discussion), and the edition on the right was published after Trump delivered a speech on immigration later in the day (and referenced Trump’s reasserting his stance that he would force Mexico to pay for the building of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border)
Remember when CNN said that Trump said he wanted to “racially profile”? they added the word “racially” and included it in quotes on the bottom of the screen.
The following is from Snopes about the above. Draw your own conclusions to why the difference in WSJ’s headlines:
This image was passed around on the Internet accompanied by the claim that the Wall Street Journal had deliberately published one headline, "Trump Softens His Tone," in a pro-Trump market area in an attempt to sway readers away from the the GOP nominee, and the other headline, "Trump Talks Tough on Wall," in a non-Trump market area to bolster support for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
However, these opposing headline editions were not distributed to different political or geographic markets, nor were they intended to influence voters.
This picture shows two editions of the Wall Street Journal published at different times of the day. The paper on the left came off the press early in the day, while the paper on the right was produced later in the day. Print newspapers sometimes undergo revisions throughout their daily runs and typically employ marks to distinguish the various editions — in this case the differing WSJ editions are distinguishable by the number of stars displayed in the masthead:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.