UNTRUTH
When a normal person does it, it is called a Lie When a child does it, it is called a Fib When a person does it in court, it is called Perjury When a politician does it, it is called Spin When a journalist does it, it is called Fake News
But is there a difference ?
And why do we not like a Lie, teach a child to forgo a Fib, punish Perjury, but suck up Spin, and just shrug our shoulders and give up on Fake News ?
WIKI gives a reasonable definition of Fake news. [1] Fake news is a neologism often used to refer to fabricated news. This type of news, found in traditional news, or fake news websites, has no basis in fact, but is presented as being factually accurate.
Claire Wardle of First Draft News identifies seven types of fake news
- satire or parody ("no intention to cause harm but has potential to fool")
- false connection ("when headlines, visuals or captions don't support the content")
- misleading content ("misleading use of information to frame an issue or an individual")
- false context ("when genuine content is shared with false contextual information")
- imposter content ("when genuine sources are impersonated" with false, made-up sources)
- manipulated content ("when genuine information or imagery is manipulated to deceive", as with a "doctored" photo)
- fabricated content ("new content is 100% false, designed to deceive and do harm”)
Those who have followed the Madeleine McCann case quickly became hypersensitive to the stream of Fake news and indeed outright lies put out by Team McCann through the compliant media. It quickly became clear, for example, that anything said by the spokesman Clarence Mitchell was likely to be the reverse of the objective and verifiable truth. Lists of his falsehoods have circulated for years.
And although at 11 years after the event, the stream of invented sightings has diminished, and the attention seems to have turned in a different direction, there remains a body of unconditional supporters of the McCanns who will hear nothing said against them, and who refuse to address issues raised by the available evidence.
Recently, and right on cue, the main offenders published two stories. The first about the impending decision of the ECHR in the case brought by the McCanns against the State of Portugal. The second about various aspects of the “Fund” and the six-monthly application for further funding for Operation Grange to continue.
Both appeared in the tabloid press, and were copied freely between and among them. Both were so riddled with mistakes, falsehoods and downright lies that they are hardly worthy of comment, except to observe that the clear intention of both was somehow to present the McCanns as permanent victims of a cruel and inhuman system.
I append the references to both articles, and will confine myself to short extracts.
Daily Mail, online. [2] Kate and Gerry McCann are returning to court to fight against the ex-detective who claimed they were responsible for Madeleine's death. No they are not. The ECHR does not take evidence from individuals, it considers documents and Legal arguments.
If they lose the case the pair will be forced to pay Goncalo Amaral £750,000, after he made a bid to sue them for compensation. No they will not. And no he did not.
The couple will face Amaral in the European Court, as public money which was funding the search for Madeleine is about to dry up. No they will not. The case is McCanns v Portugal, They have to show that Portuguese law and its Constitution is contrary to Human Rights. Their case against Dr Amaral was lost a long time ago. And in any event none of the parties ‘go’ anywhere.
A hearing is expected this year after Amaral decided to sue the McCanns when their libel case was overturned. No he did not.
The Sun, online [3] The McCanns are embroiled in a row with Goncalo Amaral. No they are not. They took him to court, won at First Instance and then lost on Appeal and on final Appeal to the Supreme Court. That part of the case is finished, over, terminated, ‘res judicata’.
The legal action is aimed at overturning a Portuguese Supreme Court ruling that — who wrote a book about the case claiming Madeleine died in Portugal and her parents covered it up — did not defame the McCanns. No it isn’t. It is about something else entirely.
If the couple lose the European Court of Human Rights case they face having to pay Amaral £430,000 in damages, plus costs, which could wipe out most of the remaining money. No they won’t. They do not have to pay Dr Amaral anything in Damages. He was the respondent in the original action. They sued HIM. And lost. So they have to pay full costs of all the actions.
As we see, if we ignore the inevitable padding in the articles, the only attempts at presentation of ‘facts’ are simply inaccurate, or wrong. Given that the authors have all the resources of their own legal departments and researchers, proof readers and sub-editors, these examples of False News can be classed as downright lies.
And furthermore, lies told with a specific intent, which makes them more sinister.
The manipulation of the public’s credulity by the Press may however be coming to a close. The internet allows people to do their own ‘research’, and to cross check the facts against many other sources. But the traditional dead-tree press continue to blunder on in the way they always have, secure in the delusion that they will be believed.
Increasingly they seem to be using a desperate form of self-justification to add an air of authority as in “I have been reporting on this case for 10 years and I can say . . . .” or “I was first on the scene . . . ” with the phrase “. . and therefore know more than you do” impliedRead more >>>> http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/2016/08/chapter-29-fake-news.html