In "The Scoop on Fake News", Glen Justice defines it as "fabricated material... generated by organizations that are not real news outfits and people who are not real reporters." Good for him for trying to draw a line — it certainty is useful, and his explanations are thoughtful and intelligent. (Do read his article after this one!)

But he gets it backwards, dangerously so. Yes, deliberate lying is "fake news". But fake news is not only deliberate lying.

Fake news is also when disproportionate attention is given to meaningless assertions. Example: President Obama's alleged non-citizenship, an obvious lie fueled by all of Mr. Justice's "credible news organizations". (Hey, they got their clicks.)

Fake news is in wording ("admitted homosexual"), camera angles, editing. You can frame anything to be anything. (Remember those great recuts of Mary Poppins and The Shining?) Report the lie once, yes. But did "real news outfits" need to repeat the phrase "death panels" endlessly in 2009?

Fake news is quoting people with no expertise in the subject they're discussing. Oh, God, how CNN loves this. Today's CNN quotes Arnold Schwarzenegger on climate change. (If I'm to believe him, shouldn't I believe Jenny McCarthy on vaccines?)

The most disturbing part of his article is how he gives certain news organizations a pass ("...the Associated Press, The Washington Post, Politico...") — based (I believe) on how newsrooms worked back when he was an active journalist. He claims that "They employ thousands of professional journalists who are trying very hard to be truthful and accurate."

Oh, honey, I'd like to revisit the '90s, too. But those thousands of professional journalists have been laid off. You know what they're doing now? "Provid[ing] custom content for marketing and advocacy programs." Just like you.

Mr. Justice writes that "Credible organizations all have strict ethics policies and fabrication is a fireable offense." But staff writers are a thing of the past: They've been replaced by low-bidding freelancers, who can't be fired. Staff fact-checkers and copyeditors are likewise gone, and remaining editors simply can't keep up.

Even if freelancers are trying to be honest and thorough, it's economically impossible. Consider: In the mid-'90s I made $0.75/word, occasionally as much as $1.50/word. It's rare that I see offers over $0.20 these days. I can't spend a week anymore working on a 1,000-word feature: I'd starve.

Regardless, Mr. Justice is saying that you should trust the organizations because they're "professional" and "credible" and "real". This is a fallacy known as argument from authority: "It's true because someone qualified says it's true." In his response to me he backs it up with more argument from authority, with himself as the authority: "I know these organizations well. I have worked with some, and know many people at others. I speak from absolute experience."

Has he never heard of Rupert Murdoch? Or William Randolph Hearst? Or Sinclair Broadcast Group?

As H. L. Mencken wrote, "There is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong." Mr. Justice's views on fake news are neat, for he draws a "bright line". They're plausible because the organizations he names have an above-average record for truthfulness.

But "above-average" is damning with faint praise. Personalities don't make a thing truthful. Reputation doesn't make a thing truthful. Facts make a thing truthful. Period.

---

Tom Geller is a writer and video/journalist (whatever that means these days). He lives in The Netherlands.