American Muslim comedian Dean Obeidallah has filed a defamation lawsuit against a white supremacist website, the Daily Stormer, after it published an article accusing him of being the mastermind behind the terror attack in Manchester.

The Daily Stormer was recently kicked off of its domain on GoDaddy and was denied service by Google and a Chinese webhost. After the controversial website published a hateful, demeaning article about Heather Heyer, who was killed in Charlottesville last weekend, the website has been even more ostracized than before.

But on Wednesday, the site was live again for a few hours through a Russian domain. In a new article, the writers praised President Trump and claimed his relationship to Russian President Vladimir Putin is responsible for the website’s new domain. But Roskomnadzor, Russia’s watchdog monitoring hateful content on the internet, requested the Russia Network Information Center to take it down, which it did.

Obeidallah filed his suit around the same time, alleging that the Daily Stormer caused him to receive death threats and suffer from emotional distress. The publication first started targeting him after he wrote a piece for the Daily Beast in 2015, in which he urged the Republican Party to speak out against the white nationalists who supported Donald Trump’s candidacy for president.

Today I filed a lawsuit against The Daily Stormer and Andrew Anglin for defamation – there are not two sides to white supremacy. pic.twitter.com/AZxysvqykt

— (((DeanObeidallah))) (@Deanofcomedy) August 16, 2017

In response, the Daily Stormer wrote an article calling Obeidallah a terrorist. Then in June of this year, Obeidallah wrote another article and questioned why Trump wouldn’t use the phrase “white supremacist terrorism.” In response, the Daily Stormer published a text with the headline, “Dean Obeidallah, Mastermind Behind Manchester Bombing, Calls on Trump to Declare Whites the Real Terrorists.”

After that article, some people actually believed Obeidallah was a terrorist, and he started receiving threats. The Daily Stormer even fabricated tweets to look like Obeidallah had written them, taking responsibility for the terror attack in Manchester in May. One of them praised Allah and another said he had fled to safety in Syria.

“Defendants took numerous steps, including mixing fact with falsehood, in an effort to create confusion and convince readers that the entirety of the Article is, in fact, true,” the lawsuit says. The Daily Stormer’s publisher, Andrew Anglin, and ten other people who republished the article are listed as defendants. None of them have responded.

“Right wing publications have come after me for years for everything from my progressive views to the fact I’m Muslim–that’s par for the course. But I had never, ever seen anything like this,” Obeidallah said.

The lawsuit also states that the Daily Stormer is among the 200 most frequented websites in America, with over 3 million monthly visitors. Though it claims to publish news stories, it intentionally spread false information, the lawsuit says. But maybe this suit can help other victims of defamation. “No one deserves to be defamed and threatened online by a racist neo-Nazi mob simply for expressing your ideas and beliefs,” Obeidallah said.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Comedian Sues the Daily Stormer for Accusing Him of Manchester Terror Attack appeared first on Law Street.

Throughout the campaign and the beginning of his presidency, President Donald Trump has criticized a lot of different people. But there is one group that he has consistently attacked with passion and fervor like no other: “The Media”

His attacks are blunt and relentless, he has gone after world-renowned organizations like the New York Times, and has even posted a video meme of himself attacking a CNN icon, calling it the “Fraud News Network.”

#FraudNewsCNN #FNN pic.twitter.com/WYUnHjjUjg

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 2, 2017

Wow, the Failing @nytimes said about @foxandfriends “….the most powerful T.V. show in America.”

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 27, 2017

He contends that these major news corporations are “enemies” to his administration because they consistently post critical stories.

But now Trump seems to have found a solution to counteract “Fake News”… his own “Real News”. On Sunday, the Trump presidential campaign announced a short weekly segment on its Facebook page called “Real News.” The show aims to be a brief two minute recap of news about the Trump Administration, straight from Trump Tower. The show is hosted by Kayleigh McEnany, a Trump-supporting CNN pundit, who resigned from her position at CNN to work on the show as well as become a spokesperson for the GOP.

While the resources to produce the show are not directly coming from Trump himself, investigative reports from The Daily Beast and Mic show that the effort is being spearheaded by Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law. The money is coming from a PAC that is raising money for Trump’s reelection campaign.

Though the show aims to produce so-called “real news,” it seems to focus more on touting Trump’s accomplishments than anything else. In the two minute segment McEnany discussed Trump’s new immigration policy, data that showed global economic confidence at an all-time high, and Trump awarding a medal to a Vietnam veteran.

It’s fair to note that this is not the first time a president has had his own “information” show. Obama’s administration hosted a weekly video series titled “West Wing Week,” which discussed the activities going on in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue during the week. Nevertheless people all over social media couldn’t get enough of the idea of Trump TV and its quest for “real news.”

Donald Trump’s “Real News” seems kinda familiar. pic.twitter.com/TAMDYHGtXq

— Zac Richey (@the_zacsta) August 2, 2017

This is the person reporting the “Real News” from Trump Tower on Trump TV.

In New York.

The End. https://t.co/tgyWJMWk9S

— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) August 7, 2017

The left must be going crazy knowing #Trump TV is “Real News”
Those who laugh last, laugh best!#MAGA #DrainTheWashingtonSwamp #YesWeWill pic.twitter.com/43erYELDin

— Joel Fischer (@JoelFischerNYC) August 7, 2017

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Trump’s “Real News” Sparks Social Media Reactions appeared first on Law Street.

Do you think you have a good handle on this week’s top news stories? Are you a regular RantCrush reader? Well, it’s time to test yourself and figure it out with our weekly news quiz! Check out the quiz below, and if you’re not already signed up to receive RantCrush each work day, click here.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Do You Know the News? appeared first on Law Street.

Have you ever thought about having the ability to make people say whatever you want? You could get the chance to make Trump say that he loves Hillary Clinton, or get Christopher Nolan to finally say that Cobb was in a dream at the end of “Inception.” Well, with the help of some new technology, soon we may all have that ability.

Earlier this month, computer scientists at the University of Washington, with the help of an artificially intelligent neural network, were able to create video footage of former President Barack Obama that they can manipulate into perfectly matching any audio recording. Check it out:

The researchers used AI to model Obama’s face, and mapped the model based on 14 hours of video and audio footage of the former president’s weekly addresses to produce a “synthetic” video replica. The researchers were even able to put in audio from an interview Obama gave in 1990, and could theoretically insert the voice of an Obama impersonator.

In an interview with tech website Digital Trends, Dr. Supasorn Suwajanakorn, a researcher on the project, said:

Unlike prior work, we never require the subject to be scanned or a speech database that consists of videos of many people saying predetermined sentences. We learn this from just existing footage. This has the potential to scale to anyone with minimal effort.

So, in the near future it may only take minimal effort to create fake videos. While the current technology requires many examples of video and audio footage to produce a forgery, it may only be a matter of years until just a few audio and voice recordings would be needed.

Earlier this year a German artist, Mario Klingemann, released a video that represented French singer Francoise Hardy depicted as a 20 year old answering questions from someone offscreen.

However, just like in the Obama video, that isn’t Hardy’s real voice. Nor is that what she looks like anymore–she’s now 73. Instead, Klingemann used the voice of Kellyanne Conway from the infamous interview in which she introduced the term “alternative facts.”

Granted, the quality of this video is nowhere near the impressive feat of the fake Obama video. But it’s important to note that this video wasn’t created by a team of scientists, but just one guy. Perhaps most impressively, it only took him a few days and required absolutely no digital editing software.

Kingemann made the video using old music video clips of Harding from her twenties, and inserted them into a generative adversarial network (GAN). GAN is a machine-learning algorithm that was developed back in 2014. It uses neural networks to learn statistical properties of audio in order to produce the context of said audio. Once the algorithim is provided with enough audio context, you can tell it what words to say, and it will do so using the speech patterns of the given individual’s voice.

Reconfiguring audio is relatively easy, but the development of images is a much more complicated process. Ian Goodfellow, the inventor of GAN and a recent addition to Google’s AI division, has made progress in improving image creation. When asked about how long until the generation of “Youtube fakers” arrives on the internet, he expected it would be about three years until anyone with a computer and minimum coding experience could have access to this technology.

However, there have been breakthroughs in how to combat this new trend in technology as well. Analysis of metadata of photos, videos, and audio recordings can tell us exactly how, when, and where the content was created and will be able to indicate if the content was doctored.

But in this day and age it’s becoming harder to convince people that everything they see and read may not be true. A significant number of people still believe a debunked theory that DNC staffer Seth Rich was killed because he leaked information pertaining to Hillary Clinton. If such conspiracy theories run rampant, how are we going to convince people that videos they can see simply aren’t real?

The potential for fake videos could have a profound effect beyond what we can imagine. Think about this: less than six months ago a man walked into a D.C. pizza restaurant with a shotgun because of a conspiracy theory spread on social media. Imagine what the reaction to “Pizzagate” could have been if there was somehow a fake video involved?

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post The Fake Obama Video: Will this Be the Next Development in Fake News? appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Thousands March in LA for President Trump’s Impeachment

Yesterday, thousands of protesters marched on the streets in downtown Los Angeles to demand President Donald Trump’s impeachment. “Down, down, down with Trump–up, up, up with the people,” they chanted. Similar protests are scheduled to take place in other cities in California and the United States. “Every day when I wake up, something is more terrible than it was yesterday,” one protester, John Meranda, said. Before the demonstration started, counter-protesters gathered outside the LAPD headquarters.

One anti-Trump demonstrator screaming at pro-Trump folks, including, “You’re a fraud! You’re a fraud! You’re a fraud!” pic.twitter.com/OpDwnd9xnp

— Laura J. Nelson (@laura_nelson) July 2, 2017

Democratic Representative Brad Sherman spoke from the stage at a rally close to LA’s City Hall, and urged other congressmen to begin an impeachment process. “We have to act now to protect our country from abuse of power and impulsive, ignorant incompetence,” he said. Even though many lawmakers have talked about impeachment, Sherman has actually taken action by drafting articles of impeachment in which he accuses Trump of trying to disrupt the investigation into Michael Flynn.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 3, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

After over a year of President Donald Trump accusing the mainstream media of disseminating “fake news,” Trump has been caught with a fake Time magazine cover hanging in many of his properties. After learning of the situation, a Time spokeswoman said that the magazine had asked the Trump Organization to remove the fictional covers but it had not yet received a response.

This counterfeit cover was hung in at least eight of Trump’s 17 golf courses, including Mar-A-Lago, which Trump has visited regularly since taking office. Additionally, the cover was hanging at Trump golf resorts in Ireland and Scotland until they were removed in the past few months, according to the Washington Post.

The fake cover, which is supposedly from March 1, 2009, praises Trump as a “television smash” and that he is “hitting on all fronts…even T.V!” But Time magazine argues that this is not a real cover. Instead, the real edition, which was released on March 2, 2009, features actress Kate Winslet on the cover with the headline “Best Actress.”

There were a handful of issues with the presentation that tipped off observers to the fact that the cover was, in fact, fake news. First, the border was too skinny and was missing a white divider. Next, secondary headlines were stacked on the right side as opposed to the top where Time traditionally places them. Some of the stories did indeed appear in that week’s edition, but others weren’t published until the following month, according to Newsweek.

Another crucial mistake was the use of two exclamation points, which Time almost never uses on the cover.

The kicker is that the bar code is fake and pulled directly from this tutorial on how to make a fake Time cover. The instructions were laid out by a Peruvian graphic designer.

This situation prompted Virginia congressman Gerry Connolly to mock Trump on Twitter.

Wow, my first cover of Time. Asked my staff to frame this and hang it in all four of my offices. @realDonaldTrump https://t.co/Hx57ZJExR8 pic.twitter.com/y1HciTB5G1

— Gerry Connolly (@GerryConnolly) June 27, 2017

While it is still unknown who exactly put together the fake cover, or whether Trump himself knew about it, it’s clear that Trump views Time covers as a sign of success. During his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump bragged about being on the cover “six for politics and…two for real estate.” According to Time magazine history, Trump has indeed appeared on the cover plenty of times in the past year, albeit not always positively. But he only appeared once for his real estate ventures and that was in January 1989.

Even when giving a speech at the CIA headquarters in January, Trump boasted that he owned the “all-time record in the history of Time magazine.” In actuality Trump has appeared on the cover 11 times up to this point while Richard Nixon, the 37th president, appeared on 55 covers before his death in 1994.

Despite having appeared on the cover of the prestigious magazine plenty of times, Trump has clearly been hyperbolic when describing his number of appearances. It is unclear whether Trump knew of the fake covers or why it was created when there were legitimate alternatives, according to the Washington Post.

While there are websites that aid the public in creating fake magazine covers, it seems unethical for the President of the United States to be promoting himself with falsified news covers. And this entire debacle seems even more troublesome in the context of Trump’s repeated attacks on the news media. 

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Time Magazine Asks Trump Organization to Remove “Fake News” Cover appeared first on Law Street.

Trump Appears to Have a Fake News Problem

It appears that President Donald Trump doesn’t check the news himself but largely relies on what his staff members give him. The problem has become significant enough for White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus to issue a warning during a senior staff meeting, telling people to stop putting things on Trump’s desk. Several times, his staff has reportedly left news stories on his desk that are completely false, such as a 1970’s “article” about a coming ice age, and one from fake news website GotNews.com that claimed deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh was the one leaking information from the White House.

Climate change is an existential threat and Trump’s 2nd most senior Nat Sec aide slips him fake news covers to minimize it. Let that sink in

— Ben Rhodes (@brhodes) May 15, 2017

According to administration officials, this practice can have tremendous consequences due to the president’s temper and mood. The wrong story can alter his agenda or lead to a tantrum. However, it seems like staff members think it’s worth the risk, as they know they can easily sway Trump’s opinion.

Priebus warns WH staff to stop slipping Trump Internet hoaxes, because he believes they’re real. https://t.co/lh4XfVBE69

— Steve Silberman (@stevesilberman) May 15, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 15, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Woman on Trial for Laughing During Jeff Sessions’ Confirmation Hearing

A female activist who was arrested back in January during Jeff Sessions’ confirmation hearing will stand trial. Desiree Fairooz laughed at one point during the hearing and was subsequently arrested. Prosecutors decided to pursue charges this week. Officer Katherine Coronado arrested Fairooz, 61, for laughing when Senator Richard Shelby said that Sessions’ record of treating all Americans equally is well-documented. According to Coronado, the laughter was loud enough to disrupt the hearing.

Another protester escorted out of Sessions hearing. Her original offense appeared to be simply laughing. pic.twitter.com/p6lWzBVFRW

— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) January 10, 2017

Fairooz said her laughter was an involuntary reflex to what she heard. And many people expressed their support of Fairooz, saying it was understandable to laugh, as Shelby’s statement was not particularly accurate. In fact, Sessions was rejected as a federal judge in 1980 over his views on race. Fairooz is charged with “disorderly and disruptive conduct” and faces up to a $500 fine and six months in prison if convicted.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 3, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Last week on Law Street we covered marijuana drive-thrus, UK’s controversial welfare “rape clause,” and fake marijuana news out of Texas. ICYMI, check out these top stories from Law Street below!

Welcome to Tumbleweed Express: America’s First Marijuana Drive-Thru

When Mark Smith realized that the residents of Parachute, Colorado craved a late-night marijuana fix, after his dispensary had closed for the day, he had an idea. Smith, 58, decided to re-brand the Valley Car Wash across the street from his dispensary as Tumbleweed Express, the nation’s first marijuana drive-thru business. The drive-thru’s grand opening coincides with the unofficial–yet widely celebrated, especially on college campuses–holiday of “4/20,” a spirited celebration of pot and paraphernalia.

Scotland’s Battle Against the UK Welfare “Rape Clause”

Protesters took to the streets of Glasgow last week to push back against the “rape clause” in the UK welfare system. After reforms of the welfare system took effect in April, the tax credits a family can receive for having children are now capped at two children–except in the case of mothers who have a third child as a result of rape. However, those mothers have to provide evidence that the child was in fact conceived from rape–a provision decried as inhumane.

No, Texas Has Not Legalized Marijuana

In case you were wondering, no, Texas has not legalized marijuana. Prank website React365 published a fake news story titled “Marijuana now legal in state of Texas” on Thursday that had many people believing the conservative state had switched its hardline stance on cannabis.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Today, President Donald Trump’s oldest son, Donald Trump Jr., appeared to enjoy a nice, relaxing day by the pool. The weather was beautiful outside, so Trump Jr.’s choice of venue makes sense. But his attire grabbed Twitter’s attention. Trump Jr. tweeted out a picture of himself wearing a t-shirt that poked a bit of fun at the “mainstream media”:

I’m going to have to buy 5-10,000 of these to pass around to our buddies in the #MSM. In the meantime I’ll model it for them. #yourewelcome pic.twitter.com/Hnn3Z5Pspm

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) April 15, 2017

And Twitter had quite a laugh editing and responding to the shirt. Check out some of the best responses in the slideshow below:

@rolandscahill @DonaldJTrumpJr Donald Jr describing himself as a model is very fake news.

— Mike P Williams (@Mike_P_Williams) April 15, 2017

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Donald Trump Jr. Gets Mocked on Twitter for “Fake News” Shirt appeared first on Law Street.

In case you were wondering, no, Texas has not legalized marijuana.

Prank website React365 published a fake news story titled “Marijuana now legal in state of Texas” on Thursday that had many people believing the conservative state had switched its hardline stance on cannabis.

According to Texas CBS affiliate KHOU, the “news” article–which has since been deleted–was shared more than 71,000 times on Facebook.

Verify: Is marijuana legal in Texas? https://t.co/n8ENJElZcG pic.twitter.com/1S5tQqAhap

— KHOU 11 News Houston (@KHOU) April 14, 2017

The excerpt bellow the title of the link reads [sic]:

In a 10-2 vote marijuana has now been legalized in the state of Texas. Texas’ first marijuana dispensaries said to open up in Corpus Christi, TX April 12, 2017. We were out speaking with local resident of Corpus Christi today who were very excited to say the least of the legalization.

Unfortunately, recreational marijuana is still illegal in the lone star state. Medical marijuana is outlawed too, however, epilepsy patients have been granted an exception when it comes to CBD oil.

In December, State Sen. Jose Menendez filed Senate Bill 269 for 2017, that would increase the number of medical conditions that qualify for the Texas Compassionate Use Program. That bill is still in committee.

FYI, a quick scan of React365’s homepage is a dead giveaway that the article was fake. The site’s header reads: “Prank your friends now! Write an article and prank your friends for fun. Bullying is forbidden.”

KHOU did a little snooping and uncovered that one Nicolas Gouriou registered the site under the organization name Mediavibes SARL. Gouriou currently resides in Binic, France.

So, when in doubt, do your due diligence before sharing suspicious–too good to be true–stories online!

For more information on each state’s marijuana legalization status, check out  our State of Weed: Marijuana Legalization State by State.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post No, Texas Has Not Legalized Marijuana appeared first on Law Street.

American and German hate speech laws are clashing this month after the approval of a German bill that permits fines of up to 50 million euros on social networking sites that fail to remove hate speech and fake news content from their platforms. The bill still needs to be approved by parliament, but if it does pass, it will be the first concrete step by a government to limit and penalize fake news production.

Companies will have 24 hours to take down content that has been flagged by users before the fines kick in. They will also be obligated to file quarterly reports and turn in “malicious” users–an issue that may prove thorny, as demonstrated by Twitter’s recent lawsuit against the federal government.

American-based sites including Facebook and Twitter have been scrambling to fight fake news over the past year but have struggled to walk the line between freedom of speech and hate speech. In Germany, where the legacy of the Nazi reign has created some of the strictest hate speech laws on the books, that line has been far more defined for decades. Under German law, volksverhetzung, which can be translated as “incitement to hatred,” is a crime punishable by heavy fines or several years of imprisonment. These punishments are usually applied to Holocaust denial and overt racist threats but by shifting the focus to social media, Germany is taking on a wider and more varied range of bigoted behavior. German justice minister Heiko Maas told the German media that “there should be just as little tolerance for criminal rabble rousing on social networks as on the street.”

The bill has already come under fire from advocates of free speech, including the EU’s digital commissioner, Andrus Ansip of Estonia. Ansip declared that over-regulating social media will harm innovation and that instead, the EU should encourage self-regulation. However, German supporters of the bill argue that websites have been neglecting reports of abuse coming in from users and that a harsher penalty is the only way to ensure that the sites will truly take fake news and hate speech seriously. The German Jugendschutz, a ministry dedicated to protecting minors online, found that Facebook only removed 39 percent of reported criminal content. Twitter removes an even smaller percentage of reported content–an estimated one in a hundred reported messages. Facebook has refuted the Jugendschutz statistic, arguing that its own analysis showed a higher rate of removal, but Twitter has not pushed back with the same vehement denial.

Tracing and deleting fake news and hate speech is a challenging task, especially for networks like Facebook and Twitter that serve hundreds of millions of users across dozens of countries every day. There is so much content to sift through that it is not surprising the social network teams are struggling to rapidly and accurately take down fake news. However, a worthwhile task shouldn’t be abandoned simply because it is difficult. The true challenge is not taking down abusive content, it is determining whether the strict German definition of hate speech can be applied in an era where even the team in the Oval Office has made disparaging and racist remarks on social media.

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post What Germany’s New Hate Speech Law Means for Social Media appeared first on Law Street.

In an interview on “Fox and Friends” on Tuesday, President Donald Trump accused former President Barack Obama of being the brain behind recent protests against Trump, and leaks from the White House. In the segment, Trump was asked whether he believed Obama was behind the incidents, including the rowdy town halls that many Republican lawmakers have recently faced.

“I think he is behind it. I also think it’s politics,” Trump answered. He has previously tweeted that “the so-called angry crowds in home districts of some Republicans are actually, in numerous cases, planned out by liberal activists.” On Tuesday he added that he thinks Obama’s “people are certainly behind it,” and also responsible for leaks from the government that “are really very serious leaks, because they’re very bad in terms of national security.” He didn’t explain how or why Obama would be leaking information from the White House, but people on Twitter had some theories.

Yes, Obama is behind all the leaks, which he saw in visions of the future before leaving, and left on post-it notes for WH staff to find.

— Kris Colvin (@KrisColvin) February 19, 2017

Trump says “Obama’s behind leaks & protests.”
And by “Obama” he means “his people.”
And by “his people” he means “the majority of US voters”

— John Fugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) February 28, 2017

Others simply wanted an explanation.

Can someone explain how Obama is behind townhall attendance/leaks? If Trump can’t explain he needs to be removed for mental health issues.

— IMPEACH OrangeJulius (@puppymnkey) February 28, 2017

But it seems like Obama has an alibi.

Trump on WH leaks: “I think that President Obama’s behind it because his people are certainly behind it.”

Obama: pic.twitter.com/q25XVeRo9c

— Nick Jack Pappas (@Pappiness) February 28, 2017

In the Fox interview, Trump also touched on his budget plan, which proposes a big increase in spending on the military but significant cuts in other areas, like EPA funding. He said it would be financed through a “revved-up economy” that is supposedly forthcoming. Also, he said the U.S. will “do things with other countries” and later ask for reimbursement, like assisting with military services.

Trump has decided not to attend the annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner, since members of the media just “make stories up.” It would be inappropriate for him to go to the dinner “in light of the fact of fake news,” he said. The “Fox and Friends” hosts even asked the president to give himself a grade based on his performance so far. He gave himself an A for achievement, but only a C for his ability to get his message out to the people.

Trump will address Congress for the first time on Tuesday night, and at least one Democrat has said he will not greet Trump when he enters the House floor. Representative Eliot L. Engel has shaken the president’s hand at every presidential address to Congress for almost 30 years, but said he will not do so this year, citing policy differences.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Believes Obama is Behind the Protests and White House Leaks appeared first on Law Street.

CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference, has been going on just outside of D.C. all week and on Friday the president took the stage. President Donald Trump spent the first half of his speech bashing the media, saying that “the dishonest press” and “fake news” are “the enemy of the people.” He went on to say that he doesn’t oppose negative stories about himself, but that the media is just making things up. Then, Trump explained how he is going to follow through on his campaign promises such as the dismantling of Obamacare, the construction of the border wall, the deportation of “bad dudes,” and the creation of more jobs.

Trump also claimed that there were so many people who wanted to see him speak that the line outside the Gaylord Hotel and Convention Center where the event is taking place went for six blocks. “There are lines that go back six blocks. I tell you that because you won’t read about it,” he said.

Reporters at Jezebel decided to look into it, and concluded that the reason you won’t read about it is because it didn’t happen; they couldn’t find any evidence of long lines. Volunteers who were stationed by the doors to check peoples’ tickets denied seeing any long lines, and the only big crowds of people to arrive simultaneously came from buses. Jezebel also pointed out that the area where the hotel is located doesn’t even stretch for six blocks.

At one point, several attendees started waving Russian flags with Trump’s name on them.

Someone handed out Trump Russian flags on the #CPAC2017 floor before Trump’s speech pic.twitter.com/uf1ADMt6ZL

— Taylor Lorenz (@TaylorLorenz) February 24, 2017

When staffers saw the flags they hurriedly confiscated them.

Crowd at CPAC waving these little pro-Trump flags that look exactly like the Russian flag. Staffers quickly come around to confiscate them. pic.twitter.com/YhPpkwFCNc

— Peter Hamby (@PeterHamby) February 24, 2017

It’s unknown who made or handed out the flags and why. It’s also unclear whether people even realized it was the Russian flag they were waving, or if they just thought it was just a flag with the American red, white, and blue colors. But according to journalist Sarah Posner, there was at least one attendee who wore a t-shirt that said “Make Russia Great Again.” Prank or not, the incident gave rise to some laughs.

@PeterHamby @mkraju “Excuse me Sir, your Russia is showing. Let me hide that for you. Carry on.”

— MichelleK (@Michelle_In_AR) February 24, 2017

Well played, anonymous CPAC monkeywrencher. https://t.co/ZXElPROsKx

— Angus Johnston (@studentactivism) February 24, 2017

Are Russian flags the Right’s answer to #pussyhats? #CPAC #TRUMP https://t.co/FM74Irzwg4

— lnmassaro (@liddabird) February 24, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What’s Up at CPAC?: Attacks on “Fake News” and Russian-Themed Trump Flags appeared first on Law Street.

These days, fake news is everywhere. After all, 2016 was marked by “post-truth” becoming the word of the year and the made-up news stories that made their way around the internet. Some of the stories that sprung up last year were so bizarre it is incredible anyone would believe them, but fake news is now being blamed for things like Donald Trump’s victory. Back in March 2015, a group of 11 European diplomats, bureaucrats, and former journalists based in Brussels started investigating the origins of fake news stories under the name East StratCom. In the 16 months since, the group has debunked about 2,500 stories.

The European Union has a new unit to combat Russian propaganda, an 11-member team called East Stratcom. https://t.co/TtsfAd8bJZ

— Steven Lee Myers (@stevenleemyers) February 21, 2017

Incorrect information has always been easily spread. But last year was different, given the controversial U.S. election, and how quickly fake stories could spread via social media, especially Facebook, which came under fire for trending fake articles in the fall. The problem was also spurred on by Google, where stories that went viral would pop up toward the top of searches because of the traffic they had gained. Purveyors of fake news would also try to make their websites look like real news sites, and place their fake stories next to genuine ones.

The European Council created East StratCom specifically “to address Russia’s ongoing disinformation campaigns.” Most of the team members know Russian and they work full time scanning the web for fake stories. They try to debunk stories in real time on social media, send out newsletters and inform their followers about fake news. They have over 14,000 followers on both Facebook and Twitter. But they say it is impossible to cover as much as they would want to.

Conspiracies: the bread & butter of pro-Kremlin disinformation. Don’t be deceived & read #DisinfoReview: https://t.co/7tkJBWaRaR pic.twitter.com/14mAFDuFFR

— EU Mythbusters (@EUvsDisinfo) February 17, 2017

This year, France, Germany, and the Netherlands all will hold elections and many people are worried that outside efforts will succeed in influencing the outcomes, like it seems they did in the U.S. The Russian goal is believed to be to undermine the European Union and gain more control in the region. And several of the team members have received death threats, with one of them being accused twice on Russian TV of being a spy.

President Donald Trump has made a point out of calling mainstream media “fake news” but has also spread incorrect information himself. In a speech at a Florida rally last weekend, Trump mentioned something that allegedly happened in Sweden when talking about immigrants and crime, implying that there had been some sort of terror attack. He later explained on Twitter that he was referring to something he’d seen on Fox News, and once again attacked Sweden and the “fake news media.”

Give the public a break – The FAKE NEWS media is trying to say that large scale immigration in Sweden is working out just beautifully. NOT!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 20, 2017

This tendency to quote false information as if it were real is an actual danger to democracy, says British politician Damian Collins who is examining the phenomenon. “There are concerns shared by many governments that fake news could become weaponized,” he said. “The spread of this type of material could eventually undermine our democratic institutions.”

And while East Stratcom works as hard as possible to debunk fake news stories, the speed of information sharing on social media has many experts doubting whether the efforts will have any effect. And given the anonymity of the internet, it is virtually impossible to find the perpetrators.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A European Task Force is Battling Fake News, One Story at a Time appeared first on Law Street.

In a press conference on Thursday afternoon, President Donald Trump careened from topic to topic, repeatedly told reporters to “sit down,” and boasted that his administration is running “like a fine-tuned machine.” He also announced his new selection for labor secretary, Alexander Acosta, who will be replacing Trump’s first choice for the post, Andrew Puzder, after it appeared Puzder would not be able to secure enough confirmation votes.

Trump used the press conference as a stage to air grievances that have been bubbling during his three and a half weeks in office. After announcing Acosta’s nomination, and admonishing the “mess” he inherited as president, Trump engaged reporters in a combative back-and-forth, in which he called for “friendly” questions and told reporters who asked him tough questions that their ratings were bad.

Trump deflected questions about former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn–who recently resigned amid reports that he misled Vice President Mike Pence about the true nature of his phone calls with the Russian ambassador–and instead called the reports “fake news.” He also said Flynn is a “fine person.” Referring to the classified information about Flynn’s call that leaked to the news media, Trump continued:

It’s all fake news. It’s all fake news. The nice thing is, I see it starting to turn, where people are now looking at the illegal — I think it’s very important — the illegal, giving out classified information. It was — and let me just tell you, it was given out like so much.

Trump was also asked if anyone in his administration had contact with Russia during the campaign. “Nobody that I know of,” he said, adding that he had “nothing to do” with Russia’s election hacking or WikiLeaks. Trump said the roll-out of his executive order that barred travel from seven countries–which a federal court temporarily froze–was “very smooth.” At one point, contrary to some reports, Trump claimed: “This administration is running like a fine-tuned machine.”

Before Trump began to riff on a menagerie of topics, he named Acosta as his pick for the new head of the Labor Department. Acosta has been the dean at Florida International University School of Law since 2009. He is a former member of the National Labor Relations Board, and a former clerk of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito from when he sat on the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. If confirmed, Acosta, the son of Cuban immigrants, would be the first Hispanic member of Trump’s cabinet.

Acosta was quickly chosen after Puzder withdrew his nomination on Wednesday. Despite unusually stiff opposition to a number of Trump’s cabinet appointees, Puzder seemed to be the first to potentially fail a confirmation vote. At least four Republican Senators signaled that they would oppose Puzder, who in recent weeks came under intense fire for personal matters, and for his labor practices as head of fast-food chains Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr.

But what started as a fairly typical speech soon devolved into a shouting match between the president and reporters; the dais became a medium for Trump to flood the briefing room with a barrage of half-baked claims and some outright falsehoods. Trump said his Electoral College victory was the largest since President Ronald Reagan in 1984. NBC reporter Peter Alexander corrected Trump, informing him that Presidents George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama won by a greater margin in 1988 and 2008 respectively.

“Why should Americans trust you?” Alexander asked. “I was given that information,” Trump responded. “I don’t know. I was just given it. We had a very, very big margin.” He continued: “Actually, I’ve seen that information around. But it was a very substantial victory. Do you agree with that?”

Toward the end of the press conference, Trump said he is “the least anti-Semitic person you’ve ever seen in your entire life,” in response to a question about the increase in anti-Semitic incidents reported in the U.S. after Election Day. April Ryan, an African-American reporter from American Urban Radio Networks, asked Trump about his agenda to help inner-cities, and if he would seek Congressional Black Caucus input. “Do you want to set up the meeting?” Trump replied. “Are they friends of yours?”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Defends Michael Flynn, Attacks Reporters at Press Conference appeared first on Law Street.

On February 8, Wikipedia editors unanimously voted to ban The Daily Mail from being used as a factual reference in their articles. The editors stated that the tabloid has a “reputation for poor fact checking and sensationalism” and is “generally unreliable.”

The ban comes at a time when the credibility of online sources is under heavy scrutiny. However, in the age of “alternative facts” and “fake news,” it’s hotly contested what constitutes credibility.

While misinformation ought to be combated, it is unclear who should lead the fight. In response to widespread concern over the reliability of internet sources, numerous organizations have announced plans aimed at curbing the proliferation of misinformation.

Having previously denied any editorial responsibility over what is shared through their respective sites, Google and Facebook have since announced efforts to prevent the spread of false stories. Both of the internet giants have promised to ban sites found guilty of publishing false stories from using their ad services.

Facebook is piloting a program that would allow users to report stories they believe to be fake, and has also announced plans to team up with major media outlets to fact check circulating stories. Meanwhile, the BBC has established a team whose mission is to “cut through the spin and concentrate on the facts.”

The degree to which these measures will reduce the spread of falsities remains to be seen. However, it is likely some corners of the internet will cry foul regardless of the outcome.

The term “fake news” lost meaning as quickly as it entered the public lexicon. At first, “fake news” meant exactly what it sounds like it means. The likes of President Trump and his followers have since co-opted the term to refer to any news outlet or piece that does not confirm their biases.

While Trump is an extreme example of someone stuck in an echo chamber, many are guilty of mistaking “credibility” with “agreeability.” Before tackling the issue of credibility, there must be some sort of consensus on what it means to be credible. We as a society must also be careful of who we allow to lead this discussion.

The internet is at an ethical impasse. The spread of misinformation is undoubtedly dangerous. Nevertheless, trusting organizations like Facebook and Google to decide what constitutes fact could be a mistake. No matter how good their intentions may seem, Facebook and Google are entities with their own independent agendas.

An outlet does not necessarily need to lie in order to misinform or to craft a narrative bias. Selecting truths can be just as damaging as spreading lies. How can we trust that these newly implemented editorial policies aimed at stemming lies won’t later be used to curate truths? In fighting misinformation, it is important that we do not carelessly privilege the ability to define and police “credibility.”

Callum Cleary

Callum is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is from Portland OR by way of the United Kingdom. He is a senior at American University double majoring in International Studies and Philosophy with a focus on social justice in Latin America. Contact Callum at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Internet’s Fight Against Fake News appeared first on Law Street.

A Tuesday interview between CNN’s Jake Tapper and President Donald Trump’s right hand woman Kellyanne Conway turned into a heated discussion and continued the feud between the news organization and the White House. After the interview, Axios reported that a “source with direct knowledge” said that some in the Republican Party have been urging at least one conservative website to track down damaging information on Jake Tapper and publish “hit pieces” on him.

Trump and CNN have had a strained relationship for some time, and since Tapper is one of the channel’s top journalists, he is a pretty obvious target. But Tapper didn’t freak out about the threat. In fact, he seemed to take it pretty lightly.

So now we sit and wait to see which obedient attack dog follows orders. Arf arf!! https://t.co/GXBrHDblQp

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) February 8, 2017

He even posted some “compromising” information about himself to stall any coming attacks.

Cut a school assembly in May 1983 to see Return of the Jedi on its first day. #TapperDirtFile #JubJub pic.twitter.com/sbuXAzQBve

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) February 8, 2017

Maybe that wasn’t so bad, but what about this one?

@jaketapper how could you pic.twitter.com/sa9YpWlJAM

— Matthew D’Ambrosio™ (@drmattdambrosio) February 8, 2017

Other people soon followed and shared own their versions of a #TapperDirtFile.

I saw @jaketapper dump his fast food garbage ENTIRELY in the garbage bin, when he COULD have sorted SOME into recyclables! #tapperdirtfile

— Jacob M. (@RealLifeHoser) February 8, 2017

@jaketapper successfully lobbied against CNN’s 1 beard policy.

…Wolf Blitzer hasn’t spoken to him since #TapperDirtFile

— Jack Tweets (@jackTweets11) February 8, 2017

The interview that started this phenomenon had to do with Trump’s recent claim that the media doesn’t report on terror attacks. The White House released a list of 78 terrorist attacks that it believes the media didn’t cover enough. The list included some of the biggest terror attacks in recent years, which were obviously very well covered by the media.

“It’s offensive given the fact that CNN and other media organizations have reporters in danger right now in war zones covering ISIS,” Tapper said on Tuesday. “And I just don’t understand how the president can make an attack like that.” Conway replied that the list was just intended to increase awareness of the international threat of terrorism.

Tapper also questioned Conway about why the president hasn’t commented publicly or tweeted about the mosque attack by a white man in Quebec City that killed six people and wounded eight. The President had tweeted about the attack outside the Louvre in Paris, where no one was killed, but the attacker was Muslim. Conway replied that the president “doesn’t tweet about everything,” even though most of us think he could probably use a break from his smartphone.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Jake Tapper Tweets Dirt About Himself After Rumors that the GOP is Targeting Him appeared first on Law Street.

From documenting human rights abuses in China to investigating political corruption scandals in Nigeria, Voice of America (VOA) often serves as the only source of global news in nations with restrictive press freedoms. Aired in more than 100 countries, translated in 61 languages, and seen by over 278 million viewers worldwide, today VOA is the largest provider of multilingual content aimed at promoting democratic interests abroad. However, recent structural changes within the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), the independent agency responsible for overseeing U.S. government information services, may result in VOA becoming more of a household name in 2017.

A new provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for the 2017 fiscal year has replaced the BBG’s bipartisan nine-member board with a single CEO selected by the president. The BBG supervises not only VOA, but also Television Martí, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and Radio Free Asia. Certain political analysts now worry that President Donald Trump could potentially capitalize on the provision and use the BBG’s vast network to combine his television background and foreign policy interests. According to Politico, “Trump is finally getting his Trump TV–financed by taxpayers to the tune of $800 million per year.”

Voice of America’s Origins

Originally VOA began as an alternative to Nazi and Japanese wartime propaganda in 1942. However, under the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, the network was forbidden from broadcasting in the United States until 2013 out of fears that it would inundate Americans with propaganda. Despite the ban being lifted during Obama’s presidency, speculations over VOA’s autonomy stem from such historic origins.

Nowadays, VOA claims that it functions as “surrogate media” in countries where state-run media supersedes the free press. Former president Gerald Ford tried to honor the agency’s editorial independence in 1976 by enacting a VOA public charter. To distance the agency from claims of propaganda, the bill solidified VOA’s commitment to promoting freedom of the press and transparent reporting on American foreign policy, according to the VOA website.

Along those lines, the BBG launched in 1994 after the International Broadcasting Act passed. Designed to function as an editorial “firewall” between American policymakers and journalists, the board was founded to prevent the State Department, White House, and other agencies from interfering with the news agency. As previously mentioned, historically the BBG has been comprised of nine members tasked with preserving the “accuracy, balance, comprehensiveness and objectivity” of the United State’s transnational media operations. Originally it was part of the U.S. Information Agency, but it became an independent agency in 1999 with the legislation of the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act.

Criticisms & Legal Changes Threatening Editorial Independence

From allegations of ineffective public diplomacy to a poorly managed $750 million budget of taxpayer dollars, the BBG is no stranger to criticism. In 2012, the board was ranked as one of the most poorly managed federal government agencies to work for due to its “hostile board dynamics,” and opponents claim the BBG fails to compete with Russia’s RT or Qatar’s Al Jazeera. According to one report, the former nine-member council was “incompetent, useless, and perhaps fatally broken” due to unqualified board members not taking the job seriously.

The new provision, which passed by a 92-7 vote in the Senate led by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-CA), replaces the board of directors with a presidential-appointed CEO who will serve a three-year term and report directly to the White House. A Washington Post article speculates that checks and balances may be eliminated by placing power into the hands of an individual chosen by the highest authority. With Trump officially in office, the story raises the concern that he could take advantage of the new amendment to elect another representative from the transpiring alt-right movement (or even elect an official with close ties to the Kremlin) to oversee the BBG.

Roots for Concern in Trump’s Administration.

According to NPR, Trump’s “attitude toward the press veers wildly depending on the favorability of the treatment he receives.” Trump, who is known for lashing out at mainstream media outlets for critical coverage, set an alarming standard when he selected Steve Bannon as his chief strategist. The appointment left many Americans fearful of what President Trump could accomplish with the spokesman of the alt-right movement as his lead accomplice, according to a New York Times article. Bannon previously served as executive chairman of hyper-conservative Breitbart News, whose columns “reflect abhorrence for so-called mainstream media organizations” such as CNN. Watchdog groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League condemned Trump’s decision based on Bannon’s platform of white nationalism and accusations of anti-Semitism.

After choosing Bannon, President Trump is expected to appoint a divergent political figure to represent  U.S. media abroad as the head of the BBG. Whoever Trump ends up appointing as the new CEO will have the ability to hire and fire media personnel at will, in addition to controlling the budget with unparalleled authority. Although the prospective CEO is also expected to choose their own five-member cabinet, they won’t have any statutory power. Skeptics from the Washington Post are saying that VOA could someday rival the Kremlin in terms of lack of oversight.

“Congress unwittingly just gave President-elect Trump unchecked control of all U.S. media outlets,” said Michael Kempner, a Democratic member of the board who was appointed by President Barack Obama and was a Hillary Clinton donor. “No president, either Democrat or Republican, should have that kind of control. It’s a public jewel. Its independence is what makes it so credible.”

Conclusion

While credible concerns have arisen over VOA’s new Trump leadership, “Trump TV” may in fact already be here. Conservative media outlet Right Side Broadcasting Network (RSBN) is often referenced using the moniker after live streaming nearly all of Trump’s events and extensively covering his campaign. In December, the new 24-hour network announced it will have access to White House press briefings, raising questions about whether President Trump intends to circumvent traditional media by allowing a non-credentialed reporter to ask questions during briefings. Regardless, Trump still has the BBG and VOA in his pocket. While VOA never managed to fulfill its potential as an American propaganda tool before, it very well could under Trump’s presidency.

Jacob Atkins

Jacob Atkins is a freelance blogger and contributor for Law Street Media. After studying print journalism and international relations at American University, Jacob now resides in Madrid where he is teaching English, pursuing multimedia reporting projects and covering global news. Contact Jacob at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

http://jacobson.pressfolios.com/

The post Will Voice of America Become ‘Trump TV’? appeared first on Law Street.

In our present information environment, there is news coming from every direction, at every angle, all the time. Due to this overabundance of information, it is often hard to tell reality from fiction. This can be especially difficult when opinions and fake news have also been interjected into the media landscape. Fake news is far from a periphery player too, in fact, it is splashed across some of the most popular websites on the internet like Facebook and Google. It may even have played a role in the outcome of the presidential election. Read on to learn more about the fake news phenomenon, its place in history, how popular websites made it mainstream, and the consequences of its rise.

The origin of “Fake News”

So what is fake news exactly? As its name suggests, fake news is literally made-up news about events that did not happen. In many cases, the creation of fake news is done by people from all over the world seeking to spread misinformation or looking to promote something and get rich doing it. One of the most egregious examples comes from a few writers in Macedonia who claim they made between $5,000 and $10,000 a month publishing fake stories. These people create extremely partisan pieces for the sole purpose of drawing the most eyeballs. The goal is to get readers interested because more traffic means more ad revenue.

But intentionally fabricating false stories isn’t the only way fake news spreads. It can also be the result of a person’s earnest, yet inaccurate beliefs such as this one example chronicled by the New York Times. Eric Tucker, a Trump supporter, posted a picture on November 9 of what he believed were charter buses bringing in paid protesters to dispute the election. While that was just how he interpreted what he saw, and something he later determined was not true, that did not stop his tweet from going viral. Tucker was a private citizen with a small Twitter following, yet his post was seized upon by several Trump supporters and conservative websites to justify their belief in a conspiracy. The way individuals interpret an event, often without full information about what actually happened, has become increasingly important.

Facebook and Google

Two of the companies that end up promoting (and profiting) from fake news the most are Facebook and Google. So how are these two tech titans attacking this problem? Before this question can be answered it is important to look at why these websites allow fake news in the first place. The issue of fake news on Facebook came to the forefront after a major incident earlier this year. In May, a member of a team that curated the “trending news” section for Facebook said that the group regularly avoided featuring conservative stories. This admission created a political firestorm that led to the end of the trending news team within Facebook and news curation on the site altogether.

In its place, Facebook installed an algorithm that would determine which news stories are being shared the most. However, shortly after its debut, the new section began elevating stories that were completely false. While the company still has some human oversight of the new trending section, they are told to exercise less editorial control over the articles that are featured, leading many fake stories to slip through.

While fake news on Facebook may not seem like a major issue on its face, a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center found that 44 percent of Americans get news on Facebook. In another, more recent poll, Pew found that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe fake news created confusion about basic facts. Facebook and other social media sites provide a way for articles to quickly go viral and reach a remarkably large audience. While most agree that the spread of fake news is a problem, finding an appropriate solution is not particularly easy. Facebook has been cautious in its response out of fear of censoring legitimate news outlets or once again projecting an anti-conservative bias.

How Companies Have Responded

The nature of Facebook’s business makes fake news a difficult issue to approach. At its core, Facebook relies on its large user base to sell advertising to. If the site eliminated fake news it could run the risk of seeming biased or alienating people and losing their engagement and possibly lucrative advertising revenue.

Despite this challenge, Facebook has said that it plans to address fake news. The CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, has stated that Facebook is already working on blocking or flagging completely false articles and recently announced a partnership with third-party fact checker sites to help accomplish that goal. Ultimately, Facebook and other companies must walk a tight line. The most blatantly false news stories may be somewhat easy to identify, but in an era of polarized politics even some facts are contested, making it hard to create a clear rule.

For Google, the approach is slightly different because its search engine is predicated on reliability–if it is just showing fake news articles it would lose the trust of its users. However, that is not to say Google has avoided fake news altogether. The most significant example of fake news on Google is a result of the way the search engine ranks results. While search results often feature articles from the company’s curated Google News section, the “Top Stories” at the top of many search results include a broader range of articles that in some cases include fake news. It is particularly confusing because when you click to “read more” articles, it takes you to the Google News section, which is editorially vetted. This stems from the fact that Google Search and Google News are viewed as separate entities by Google. This distinction really becomes problematic because Google News does not accept ad revenue whereas Google Search does. A similar issue exists on Google’s mobile platform, which features AMP stories–web pages that are optimized to load almost instantly on mobile devices–at the top of the results page. This is yet another way for fake news to sneak into the top of the results page.

Google uses an algorithm to weed out spam and fake news websites, although it is not 100 percent foolproof. In light of the recent debate, Google has promised to fight fake news by restricting fake news sites’ access to its AdSense platform, which is often their source of revenue–fake news sites make money by generating a lot of traffic and serving viewers ads, often using Google’s advertising tools. Facebook also made a similar move to prevent fake news sites from using its advertising network.

The following video looks at fake news online and what companies are doing to stop it:

The Impact of Fake News

As many realize the extent to which fake news has spread online, some wonder whether it could have impacted the outcome of the recent election, as news reports indicate that fake news tends to have a conservative bias. Although it is impossible to show the exact impact of fake news on the election–and although Mark Zuckerberg dismissed the notion that fake news was consequential in the election–widespread false information is almost certain to have some sort of impact on people. In fact, according to an article from Buzzfeed News, there was actually more engagement with the top fake election news articles on Facebook than with the top content from traditional media sources in the last three months of the campaign. But, like many factors used to explain the election results, it’s impossible to say whether or not fake news actually tipped the election one way or another.

The video below features a PBS NewsHour discussion of fake news and its potential impact.

The effect of fake news has also been felt outside of the United States. An example would be in the Philippines, where a spokesperson for the president posted graphic images to justify the country’s violent campaign against drug dealers, even though fact checkers later realized that the images were actually taken in Brazil. Fake news also spread widely in the lead up to elections in Indonesia and a fake article about the Colombian peace deal with the FARC went viral shortly before the referendum vote. The problem was so disruptive that some African nations shut down social media sites after unconfirmed security threats spread before elections.

Fake news certainly has precedent in the United States. From the late 1890s through to the 1920s something known as Yellow Journalism reigned. During that period, competing newspapers would publish sensational and often false stories, each more so than the last, in an effort to win eyeballs. The scourge of Yellow Journalism became so bad at one point that many believe it contributed to the Spanish-American War of 1898.

Conclusion

So what is to be done about this problem? Some suggest that Google and Facebook could help create a crowd-sourced list of news stories that can be peer-reviewed. Others argue that big companies should not have the power to determine what is true. Recent efforts to reduce fake news sites’ access to the biggest advertising networks may help get rid of their financial incentives, but alternative ad networks may not follow suit.

The example of Yellow Journalism may also be a model to look at. The exaggerated and fabricated news stories at the turn of the 20th century were ultimately undone by waning public interest, court cases that protected the privacy of individuals, and a code of ethics adopted by many newspapers. But in the modern news environment centered around internet, and the abundance of media that comes with it, it may be difficult to weed out these stories altogether.

In the meantime, identifying fake news is a case by case effort that requires everyone’s diligence. It requires a balancing act of separating reality from fiction, but also a tolerance for information that you may not agree with and a skepticism for that which confirms your existing beliefs. Efforts of this nature are already underway on the platforms where most fake news is found. Now it is up to readers to determine if what they see is legitimate or not. If anything, the rise of fake news may drive people to become more critical news consumers.

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Reality Behind Fake News appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Friday everyone! Last night, Trevor Noah came up with a pretty good summary of the year, saying: “2016 started with Zika and then turned bad.” But satire is the best medicine, so watching Noah’s clip could help. Hope you have a great weekend and see you on Monday! Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Is This America? NC Republicans Attempt a Legislative Coup

You might have thought that American politics couldn’t get any messier right now. But in North Carolina, the GOP has basically staged a coup. When it became clear on November 9 that Pat McCrory was losing the governor’s seat, he claimed the results were too close to call, with Democrat Roy Cooper only 4,300 votes ahead. He then demanded a statewide recount and claimed that there was voter fraud, before admitting defeat on December 5. But now the GOP is trying to undermine the results by introducing two bills, HB 17 and SB 4, which would essentially strip Cooper of a lot of power.

North Carolina Republicans Make Brazen Bid for Permanent Power After Losing Governor’s Race https://t.co/VFFwNLaSpx pic.twitter.com/iNXPiSmRVQ

— Patrick (@cahulaan) December 15, 2016

The bills would prevent the new governor from making some cabinet appointments, restrict how many Democratic lawmakers could be hired, and basically ensure Republican rule continued. And last night, the NC House passed HB 17, so it’s now up to the NC Senate to decide what to do.

Denying the results of a democratic election is alarming. As Slate writes, “What’s happening in North Carolina is not politics as usual. It is an extraordinarily disturbing legislative coup, a flagrant effort to maintain one-party rule by rejecting democratic norms and revoking the will of the voters.”

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: December 16, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Pope Francis called on the media to seek transparency and truth in the wake of an election cycle influenced heavily by fake news–reports that the pope found to be scandal-minded and sinful.

The leader of the Catholic Church compared the spreading of disinformation to an unhealthy obsession with feces in an interview with the Belgian Catholic weekly, Tertio. The pope said:

I believe that the media should be very clear, very transparent, and not fall prey–without offense, please–to the sickness of coprophilia, which is always wanting to communicate scandal, to communicate ugly things, even though they may be true.

The unusual term, coprophilia, is a medical term used to describe arousal from excrement or feces.

Pope Francis used the example to criticize the media’s pleasure in spreading such “disinformation,” and said it would be a sin for a journalist’s purpose to be anything other than educating the public.

“Disinformation is probably the greatest damage that the media can do, as opinion is guided in one direction, neglecting the other part of the truth,” Pope Francis explained.

The pope commented on the temptations to raise slanderous claims, but went on to say that every person has the right to a good reputation.

“[The] communications media have their temptations. They can be tempted by calumny, and therefore used to slander, to sully people, especially in the world of politics,” the pope said.

Wednesday’s interview heavily referenced the global debate over the surge of fake news websites. According to some observers, the abundance of fake news during the 2016 presidential election could have swayed the election in favor of Donald Trump.

Shockingly enough, the pope is no stranger to the fake news cycle.

A story that circulated earlier this year reported that Pope Francis endorsed Donald Trump for President of the United States. The article was completely fabricated and proven to be false.

Bryan White

Bryan is an editorial intern at Law Street Media from Stratford, NJ. He is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Broadcast Journalism. When he is not reading up on the news, you can find him curled up with an iced chai and a good book. Contact Bryan at BWhite@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Pope Francis Calls Fake News a Sin, Compares it to Fascination With Feces appeared first on Law Street.

A North Carolina man was arrested Sunday after he entered a Washington D.C. pizzeria with an assault rifle hoping to investigate an online fake news story involving Hillary Clinton.

Police respond to reports of man with gun at Comet Ping Pong restaurant in D.C. https://t.co/ccH50zq6KH pic.twitter.com/b6mLPkxxRg

— WTOP (@WTOP) December 4, 2016

Police say Edgar Maddison Welch, 28, of Salisbury, North Carolina walked into Comet Ping Pong–located in Chevy Chase–and pointed an AR-15 assault-style rifle in the direction of a restaurant employee, who fled and called police.

Welch reportedly fired the rifle inside of the restaurant, but no one was injured.

According to the Washington Post, police also seized a Colt .38 caliber handgun and a shotgun from Welch. One of those weapons was found inside the restaurant, while the other was located in his car.

Comet Ping Pong was the unlucky target of the #Pizzagate conspiracy theory that went viral last month. A string of fake news stories claimed that then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and her campaign chairman John Podesta were running a pedophilic sex ring from the pizzeria’s back rooms.

None of the rumors were true, but that didn’t stop the restaurant’s owner, James Alefantis, and his employees from being attacked on social media and receiving death threats.

Reddit banned the Pizzagate subreddit from its site, citing its strict policies against posting personal information of others; however, this was met with a wave of criticism from users on r/The_Donald, a popular pro-Trump subreddit, who felt Reddit’s decision was an act of censorship.

Every “conspiracy” theory has proven right&media wrong. Comet ping pong and #Pizzagate are real. I trust Twitter “reporters” more than CNN

— Jill SteinCrazy (@terrymendozer) December 5, 2016

The rise of fake news stories has become a growing concern as some experts argue it altered the fate of the presidential election. Facebook even went as far as to announce plans to crack down on fake news, but eradicating these types of stories from social media may be next to impossible.

In a statement on Sunday, Alefantis vowed that Comet Ping Pong would “continue to operate safely and securely,” and he condemned those who are working to spread the malicious accusations.

“What happened today demonstrates that promoting false and reckless conspiracy theories comes with consequences,” he said. “I hope that those involved in fanning these flames will take a moment to contemplate what happened here today, and stop promoting these falsehoods right away.”

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Comet Ping Pong Gunman Says He Was ‘Investigating’ Fake News Story appeared first on Law Street.

As of Monday, two of the largest internet sites have decided to cut off fake news outlets from their advertising services.

These moves are a part of a crackdown on the dissemination of false or misleading news that plagued and possibly influenced the recent presidential election.

With growing criticism of both Google and Facebook, each took a stand to not tolerate these sources any longer. Google said on Monday afternoon that it would no longer allow fake news websites to use its online advertising services, according to the New York Times.

Facebook followed, updating its advertising policy in the Facebook Audience Network to include fake news sites in the section prohibiting misleading or false content.

In a statement to the New York Times, a Facebook spokesperson said, “We have updated the policy to explicitly clarify that this applies to fake news,” and that it will continue to verify people who want to advertise with them.

On Saturday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg took to his Facebook page to discuss the substantial scrutiny that he and his company have received.

In a Facebook post Zuckerberg wrote:

Of all the content on Facebook, more than 99 percent of what people see is authentic. Only a very small amount is fake news and hoaxes. The hoaxes that do exist are not limited to one partisan view, or even to politics. Overall, this makes it extremely unlikely hoaxes changed the outcome of this election in one direction or the other.

In the comments section, one user pointed out that the 1 percent figure seemed awfully low. Zuckerberg clarified his statement, saying that that figure represents the platform as a whole, not individual experiences. Therefore, depending on who or what you follow, you may see more or less fake news on your newsfeed.

Google has also come under fire recently after the top result for the search “Final Vote Count 2016” was linked to the news site 70news, which falsely claimed that Donald Trump had won the popular vote, according to Mediaite.

Google’s top search result for “final election numbers” leads to fake news site with false numbers https://t.co/3DA5ZY6pQk pic.twitter.com/v3GTEvUgW8

— CBS News (@CBSNews) November 14, 2016

One section of the article (falsely) said:

UPDATE 11/14/16: THREE MILLION ILLEGALS VOTED THIS 2016 ELECTION. THAT’S NOT VALID! REMOVE 3 MILLION VOTES FROM HILLARY CLINTON. PLUS THE OTHER VOTE FRAUD. TRUMP BY DEFAULT IS THE WINNER IN THE POPULAR VOTE!

By Monday evening, the article was moved down to the second result. Google relies on algorithms to create search results, and like this example, does not always present accurate information.

With hundreds of different fake or misleading news sites out there, various individuals and groups have compiled their own lists of sites to avoid. Melissa Zimdars, assistant professor of communication at Merrimack College in Massachusetts, said her list “started as a resource for my students, who are learning about journalism/social media/media literacy.” She breaks up outlets by category, ranking their level of falsehood. She also included satirical sites such as the Onion and the Borowitz Report.

A majority of U.S. adults get their news from social media, rather than traditional news sources, according to a Pew Research Center report. Over 40 percent get their news from Facebook specifically.

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post You’ll Never Believe Why Your Friends Posted so Many Fake News Stories appeared first on Law Street.

A few months ago Facebook faced criticism and close scrutiny over how the content of peoples’ newsfeeds and trending stories are actually curated rather than based on impartial numbers. As a response to that controversy, Facebook got rid of its human editors in September and replaced them with an algorithm that automatically puts the top article for whatever topic is trending on top of the page.

But even though humans still watch over the system in case something goes wrong, the algorithm has gotten things very wrong. The Washington Post revealed on Wednesday that Facebook actually has repeatedly trended fake news since the change. Reporters conducted an experiment by looking deeper into the Facebook trending topics, and found that between the period of August 31 and September 22, they found five totally fake stories trending and three that were deeply inaccurate. They also found that things like links to iTunes, blog posts, and news releases often trended.

And social media users have noticed.

Facebook is literally nothing but fake articles, ultrasound pictures, engagements and arguements. Zzzzz

— Jeff Michener (@JeffMich4L) October 6, 2016

“I’m not at all surprised how many fake stories have trended. It was beyond predictable by anyone who spent time with the actual functionality of the product, not just the code,” said an employee who used to be on the team that oversaw “Trending,” speaking to the Washington Post on condition of anonymity.

I honestly can’t wait for the election to be over so everyone can go back to posting fake articles about celebrities dying on Facebook

— Madison (@_madisonike) October 5, 2016

One example of a fake story featured a man being kicked off of a college campus for praying, which was misinformed–the man was able to fill out some papers to keep praying in the campus area, but a student who had joined him for prayer was upset about it. Then there was a story about how fantastic the new iPhone is from a satirical fake news page, a news release from a discredited medical organization, and a story about 9/11 that falsely claimed to have proof that bombs were planted in the Twin Towers before the planes hit them.

The trending function on Facebook exists to highlight the most discussed and newsworthy topics of the day for its users. It is hard to know what Facebook is planning to do about the fake news–at a recent news conference it was indicated that the company might add filters to get rid of hoaxes and satirical content on the trending function, as it has on the newsfeed.

But, as scientist Walter Quattrociocchi told the Post, Facebook is an ideal breeding ground for conspiracies and misinformation due to its users’ tendencies to cluster together in like-minded groups. And combined with the personalized content in the newsfeeds, the fake news stories that are adapted to peoples’ personal likes risk increasing polarization between groups, and undermining understanding of people that are different. So let’s just all take Facebook with a grain of salt and keep an open mind.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Facebook Has Trended Fake Articles Since Getting Rid of Human Editors appeared first on Law Street.