When you post unverified, unsourced speculation here at DU...

[Tommy_Carcetti]

52. It was tied together with a legitimate news story and that was the true danger.

For a little while, "fake news" was a term that actually referred to a real phenomenon--False stories, usually meant to boost Trump or hurt Democrats, posing as news and designed to spread virally for maximum effect over social media. This was done by both foreign and domestic actors and was intended to sway the 2016 election in favor of Donald Trump.

Problem was, the term quickly became co-opted by Trump and the right to refer to any news story that is not flattering or supportive of Donald Trump, even if it is well sourced, documented and by all objective means, true.

So, if you go onto DU, and you post a legitimate, well-sourced story like the Phil Rucker Washington Post piece, correctly framing it as news....but you then immediately tie it to some reckless, completely speculative and unsupported claim by an anonymous Twitter account, it brings down the ship.

Because we'll hear, "Oh, those liberals at DU. They'll believe anything." And "anything" to them will not only be referring to the Twitter BS, but also the legitimate Post story. They'll lump them together, all one in the same, because someone here was foolish to do the same thing.

We need the media to be encouraged as much as possible to accurately report stories as a means to counter the propaganda being put out by the Trump administration. When you dilute that with bullshit, it only hurts our cause greatly.