How do we distinguish between "fake news" and honest mistakes?

[LAS14]

I've been looking for something to latch on to and Hillary has come through again, with her call for legislation addressing the problem of fake news. Like Bill said, she always wants to DO SOMETHING.

One of the puzzles is how to distinguish out and out lies from nuanced mistakes. What should our answers be to this sort of thing?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/12/10/hillary-clinton-fake-news/

[Jean-Jacques Roussea]

1. republicans don't understand what fake news is

Fake news isn't bad reporting or reporting incorrectly, it's a deliberate attempt to advance an agenda through manipulation. But they don't care about reality anymore so

[LAS14]

2. Yeah, but what do we say in response? This was on Google News.

[Jean-Jacques Roussea]

3. tell Google that breitbart isn't news

I've already sent a couple complaints to that effect.

[BainsBane]

4. You have to inform yourself

That article is deliberately deceptive. You inform yourself about the particular charges and respond to them.

The fake news we've read about is completely made up stuff. There are guys in Macedonia and such places inventing stories that get spread around on FB. There is nothing true about any of them. That the GOP BS claims about Benghazi is not comparable to completely invented claims about a sex ring at a pizza parlor. For one thing, the video was a factor in the attack. That entire argument is a recycled GOP whine, nothing more.

[LAS14]

5. I don't need to understand. I do ...

... understand. I just don't know how to put it in language that I can use to combat this stuff.

[BainsBane]

6. It's unlikely you can persuade them

All you can do is point out facts and links to respected sources. the problem is a lot of people aren't interested in the truth. We live in a post-fact world where people believe whatever they want and reject anything that conflicts with it. Sadly, that tendency cuts across the political spectrum.