From: James Mouw <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 00:18:55 +0000

There's a huge difference between misinformed news or news that turned
out to be wrong, and just plain malicious FAKE news meant to harm and
with ZERO basis in fact. How can anyone not see that?? More than
enough said.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 27, 2016, at 6:15 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Susan Lafferty <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 23:03:28 +0000
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Just because we respect some journalists and news outlets and not
> others doesn’t mean we have a role in deciding what is fact and what
> is fiction.
>
> If we choose to preserve 'real news' and not 'fake news' we do a
> disservice to those outlets that don't toe the line and to readers who
> believe those outlets.
>
> Do we have a right to preserve only our own reality?  I think not.
>
> ·        Think of how inaccurate the reporting was with regard to
> polls in the recent US elections - that reporting was 'fake news' too.
>
> ·        What about all the reporting of WMDs in Iraq? Are we
> preserving the outlets that challenged this ‘real news’?
>
> ·        Think of all the conspiracy theories about JFK - now some of
> them appear to hold some truth...
>
> ·        In previous generations, censorship and misinformation have
> been utilised in mainstream media for ‘national security’ purposes
>
> ·        In previous generations, McCarthyism was given a voice in
> mainstream media.
>
> ·        In previous generations minorities had NO voice in mainstream media.
>
> ·        What about when Oliver Cromwell was the good guy? (see? some
> of you will say he still is, others won’t)
>
> Left and right wing ‘rags’ and rubbish magazines tell us the truth
> sometimes when we don’t want to hear it. Someone needs to preserve
> them too.
>
> We have a responsibility to preserve 'fake news' as sources of
> research for future generations.  If not, we run the risk of
> increasing the bias of preserved knowledge available to them.  Just
> like my Japanese friend was never taught anything about WWII in
> school…
>
> Let those future generations decide for themselves, in hindsight, what
> was true and what was fake, by giving them the whole picture.
>
> Maybe Mark Zuckerberg could continue to rely on the Facebook community
> to decry ‘false news’ and concentrate on weeding out bullies.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Susan Lafferty
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernie Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 18:51:02 +0000
>
> Some brief thoughts on what the post-election “fake news” debate has
> to do with research libraries, at:
>
> https://www.crl.edu/blogs/fake-news.
>
> With a responsibility to ensure future citizens an accurate and
> complete public record, research libraries have a stake in the
> survival of “fact-based” reporting and independent journalism.
>
> Licensing, and using the power of the library purse, could afford us
> some leverage.  CRL's electronic resources strategy is designed to
> confront the challenges.
>
> Best to all for the Thanksgiving Holiday.
>
> Bernard F. Reilly
> www.CRL.edu