Media List of “Fake” News Websites Includes: Breitbart, Infowars, Zerohedge, Twi

[MikeWB]

Google/FB/Twitter and MSM have declared a war on alternative media. They're now going to label anyone who doesn't agree with their line as "fake news" and will remove them from newsfeeds and will remove advertising.

This is Orwellian. Tech war is upon us.



BREAKING: Latest Media List of "Fake" News Websites Includes: Breitbart, Infowars, Zerohedge, Twitchy, The Blaze

Jim Hoft Nov 16th, 2016 10:18 am Leave a Comment

Internet giants proposed new regulations to crack down on content this week.

This comes one week after Hillary Clinton suffered a stunning loss to Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.


Google, Facebook and Twitter announced changes this week.
Via KMOV—

Both Facebook and Google have announced that they are curbing the searchability of phony news across their platforms.

Google said they would stop fake and misleading websites from utilizing the company's ad-selling software, stopping their revenue.

Twitter also announced Tuesday that it would update its "mute" function for users to hide content they do not want to see.

Now we have a rough idea who they are going to target...

A far left Massachusetts professor has compiled a list of "fake and misleading" news websites.

From his report—

False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and/or Satirical "News" Sources

Disclaimer 1: All of the contents in this document reflect the opinion of the author and are for educational purposes only. This resource was split into categories around 8:00pm EST on 11/15/16.

CATEGORY 1: Below is a list of fake, false, or regularly misleading websites that are shared on Facebook and social media. Some of these websites may rely on "outrage" by using distorted headlines and decontextualized or dubious information in order to generate likes, shares, and profits. These websites are categorized with the number 1 next to them.
CATEGORY 2: Some websites on this list may circulate misleading and/or potentially unreliable information, and they are marked with a 2.
CATEGORY 3: Other websites on this list sometimes use clickbait-y headlines and social media descriptions, and they are marked with a 3.
CATEGORY 4: Other sources on this list are purposefully fake with the intent of satire/comedy, which can offer important critical commentary on politics and society, but have the potential to be shared as actual/literal news. I'm including them here, for now, because 1.) they have the potential to perpetuate misinformation based on different audience (mis)interpretations and 2.) to make sure anyone who reads a story by The Onion, for example, understands its purpose. If you think this is unnecessary, please see Literally Unbelievable.

Here is the list—  Notice the prominent conservative websites on the list, including: Breitbart, Infowars, Twitchy, The Blaze, Bizpac Review, etc.

100PercentFedUp.com (2,3)   EnduringVision.com (1)   PakAlertPress.com
21stCenturyWire.com (2, 3)   FPRNradio.com   PoliticalBlindSpot.com
70news.wordpress.com (1)   The Free Thought Project (3)   PoliticalEars.com
Abcnews.com.co (1)   GeoEngineeringWatch.org   Politicalo (1)
ActivistPost.com (2, 3)   *Website Removed* (temporarily)   PoliticusUSA
Addicting Info (3)   GovtSlaves.info   PrisonPlanet.com
AmericanNews.com (1)   GulagBound.com   PrisonPlanet.tv
AnonNews.co (3)   HangTheBankers.com   Private-eye.co.uk (includes 4)
Associated Media Coverage   HumansAreFree.com   ProjectVeritas
BeforeItsNews.com   Huzlers (4)   *Website Removed* (temporarily)
Being Liberal   IfYouOnlyNews   React 365
BigAmericanNews.com   Indecision Forever (1)   RealFarmacy.com
BigPZone.com   IJR (Independent Journal Review)   RealNewsRightNow.com (1, 4)
Bipartisan Report   InfoWars (1, 2)   RedFlagNews.com
BizPac Review   Infowars.com   Red State (3)
Blue Nation Review (2,3)   IntelliHub.com   Reductress (4)
Breitbart (2, 3)   Inquisitr.com   RileNews.com (1, 4)
Call the Cops (4)   JonesReport.com   Satira Tribune
Cap News  (4)   LewRockwell.com   Sprotspickle.com (4)
ChristWire.org (4)   Liberal America   The Blaze
Chronicle.su   LibertyTalk.fm   The Free Thought Project (3)
CivicTribune.com (1)   LibertyUnyielding   Borowitz Report (4)
ClickHole.com (4)   LibertyVideos.org   The Onion (4)
CoastToCoastAM.com (2)   LMR/LibertyMovementRadio.com   The Other 98% (3)
CollectiveEvolution (3)   MediaMass.net (1)   The Reporterz
ConsciousLifeNews.com (2)   MegynKelly.us (1)   The Stately Harold
ConservativeOutfitters.com (2)   MSNBC.com.co (1)   TheDailySheeple.com
ConspiracyWire (WideAwakeAmerica.com) (2)   MSNBC.website (1)   TheNewsNerd.com
CountdownToZeroTime.com (2)   Naha Daily (4)   TheRunDownLive.com
CounterPsyOps.com   National Report   TheUsPatriot.com
*Website Removed* (temporarily)   NationalReport.net (1)   TruthFrequencyRadio.com
CreamBMP.com (1)   NaturalNews.com   Twitchy.com (3)
DailyBuzzLive.com   NC Scooper   UnconfirmedSources.com
DailyCurrant.com   NCT (New Century Times)   *Website Removed* (temporarily)
*Website Removed* (temporarily)   News Examiner   USA Supreme
Daily Wire   News-Hound.com (1)   US.Blasting.News
DCClothesLine.com   NewsBiscuit.com (1)   US Uncut (3)
DCGazette.com (1)   Newslo (1, 4)   VeteransToday.com
DerfMagazine.com   NewsMutiny.com (1, 4)    *Website Removed*
(temporarily)

Disclose.tv   Newswatch 28   WakingUpWisconsin.com
DrudgeReport.com.co (1)   Newswatch 33   Winning Democrats
DuffleBlog.com (4)   NewsWire-24.com   WitScience.org
DuhProgressive.com   NoDisInfo.com   World Net Daily
Embols.com   Now8News   World News Daily Report (4)
Empire Herald   NowTheEndBegins.com   WorldTruth.tv
Empire News (1)   Occupy Democrats (3)   ZeroHedge
EmpireNews.com      
Endingthefed.com      
This list is being promoted around the country. It was originally posted at WTVM in Georgia and was running at KMOV in St. Louis.


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/breaking-media-list-fake-news-websites-includes-breitbart-infowars-zerohedge-twitchy-blaze/

[rmstock]

Well they better speed up their game,
which is gonna stop at January 20, 2017.

Trump should however spend and focus good time
on how Google , Facebook and Twitter were literally
shaking down the White House under Obama ... :


The Android Administration
Google's Remarkably Close Relationship With the Obama White House, in Two Charts
Illustration by The Intercept. Photo: Emmanuel Dunand/AFP/Getty Images

David Dayen April 22 2016, 3:00 p.m.
https://theintercept.com/2016/04/22/googles-remarkably-close-relationship-with-the-obama-white-house-in-two-charts/

  "When President Obama announced his support last week for a Federal
   Communications Commission plan to open the market for cable set-top
   boxes — a big win for consumers, but also for Google — the cable and
   telecommunications giants who used to have a near-stranglehold on tech
   policy were furious. AT&T chief lobbyist Jim Cicconi lashed out at what
   he called White House intervention on behalf of "the Google proposal."
   
   He's hardly the first to suggest that the Obama administration has
   become too close to the Silicon Valley juggernaut.
   
   Over the past seven years, Google has created a remarkable partnership
   with the Obama White House, providing expertise, services, advice, and
   personnel for vital government projects.
   
   Precisely how much influence this buys Google isn't always clear. But
   consider that over in the European Union, Google is now facing two
   major antitrust charges for abusing its dominance in mobile operating
   systems and search. By contrast, in the U.S., a strong case to sanction
   Google was quashed by a presidentially appointed commission.
   
   It's a relationship that bears watching. "Americans know surprisingly
   little about what Google wants and gets from our government," said Anne
   Weismann, executive director of Campaign for Accountability, a
   nonprofit watchdog organization. Seeking to change that, Weismann's
   group is spearheading a data transparency project about Google's
   interactions in Washington.
   
   The Intercept teamed up with Campaign for Accountability to present two
   revealing data sets from that forthcoming project: one on the number of
   White House meetings attended by Google representatives, and the second
   on the revolving door between Google and the government.
   
   As the interactive charts accompanying this article show, Google
   representatives attended White House meetings more than once a week, on
   average, from the beginning of Obama's presidency through October 2015.
   Nearly 250 people have shuttled from government service to Google
   employment or vice versa over the course of his administration.
   
   
   Photo: Paul Morigi/Getty Images
   
   No other public company approaches this degree of intimacy with
   government. According to an analysis of White House data, the Google
   lobbyist with the most White House visits, Johanna Shelton, visited 128
   times, far more often than lead representatives of the other
   top-lobbying companies — and more than twice as often, for instance, as
   Microsoft's Fred Humphries or Comcast's David Cohen. (The accompanying
   chart reflects 94 Shelton visits; it excludes large gatherings such as
   state dinners and White House tours.)
   
   The information, Weismann said, "will help the public learn more about
   the company's influence on our government, our policies, and our lives."
   
   Asked to respond, Google spokesperson Riva Litman referred The
   Intercept to a blog post written when the Wall Street Journal raised
   similar questions a year ago. In that post, Google said the meetings
   covered a host of topics, including patent reform, STEM education,
   internet censorship, cloud computing, trade and investment, and smart
   contact lenses. The company also claimed to have counted similar
   numbers of visits to the White House by Microsoft and Comcast — but it
   did not explain its methodology for parsing the data.
   
   Google's dramatic rise as a lobbying force has not gone unnoticed. The
   company paid almost no attention to the Washington influence game prior
   to 2007, but ramped up steeply thereafter. It spent $16.7 million in
   lobbying in 2015, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, and
   has been at or near the top of public companies in lobbying expenses
   since 2012.
   
   But direct expenditures on lobbying represent only one part of the
   larger influence-peddling game. Google's lobbying strategy also
   includes throwing lavish D.C. parties; making grants to trade groups,
   advocacy organizations, and think tanks; offering free services and
   training to campaigns, congressional offices, and journalists; and
   using academics as validators for the company's public policy
   positions. Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Alphabet, Google's
   parent company, was an enthusiastic supporter of both of Obama's
   presidential campaigns and has been a major Democratic donor.
   
   For its part, the Obama administration — attempting to project a brand
   of innovative, post-partisan problem-solving of issues that have
   bedeviled government for decades — has welcomed and even come to depend
   upon its association with one of America's largest tech companies.
   
   Google doesn't just lobby the White House for favors, but collaborates
   with officials, effectively serving as a sort of corporate extension of
   government operations in the digital era.
   
   In just the past few years, Google has provided diplomatic assistance
   to the administration through expanding internet access in Cuba;
   collaborated with the Department of Housing and Urban Development to
   bring Google Fiber into public housing; used Google resources to
   monitor droughts in real time; and even captured 360-degree views of
   White House interiors.
   
   But perhaps most salient here is the fact that modern life requires so
   much information technology support that a sprawling operation like the
   White House has turned to tech companies — often in the form of
   ex-Google employees — when faced with pressing IT needs.
   
   Practically every part of the government makes available some form of
   technology, whether it's the public-facing website for a federal
   agency, a digital mechanism for people to access benefits, or a new
   communications tool for espionage or war.
   
   Somebody has to build and manage those projects, and Silicon Valley
   firms have the expertise needed to do that. White House officials have
   publicly asked Silicon Valley for aid in stopping terrorists from
   recruiting via social media, securing the internet of things, thwarting
   cyberattacks, modernizing the Defense Department, and generally
   updating all their technology. We can reasonably expect yet more things
   are being asked for behind closed doors.
   
   
   Photo: Philips Communications/Flickr
   
   The disastrous launch of HealthCare.gov in October 2013 is the most
   obvious example. Within weeks of the site going live, Chief Technology
   Officer Todd Park, his top deputy Nicole Wong (a former Google deputy
   general counsel), and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough held
   meetings with Google personnel.
   
   In Time magazine, Steven Brill detailed one of those meetings, between
   Park and Gabriel Burt, the chief technology officer at Eric Schmidt's
   Civis Analytics. Civis was already working on Obamacare as a vendor for
   Enroll America, a nonprofit tasked with getting people subscribed on
   the insurance exchanges. Civis used reams of data to target communities
   with high levels of uninsured Americans so Enroll America could contact
   them. But now the site where they were supposed to sign up wasn't
   working. So the White House turned to Civis for help with that as well.
   
   Eventually, Mikey Dickerson, a site-reliability engineer with Google
   who previously worked on the Obama campaign, got hired to fix the site.
   Burt and Dickerson worked together to "form a rescue squad" for
   HealthCare.gov, according to Time. And most of the recruits came from
   Google. Later, Dickerson led the U.S. Digital Service, a new agency
   whose mission was to fix other technology problems in the federal
   government. Ex-Google staffers were prevalent there as well. Dickerson
   attended nine White House meetings with Google personnel while working
   for the government between 2013 and 2014.
   
   Meetings between Google and the White House, viewed in this context,
   sometimes function like calls to the IT Help Desk. Only instead of
   working for the same company, the government is supposed to be
   regulating Google as a private business, not continually asking it for
   favors.
   
   Much of this collaboration could be considered public-minded — it's
   hard to argue with the idea that the government should seek outside
   technical help when it requires it. And there's no evidence of a quid
   pro quo. But this arrangement doesn't have to result in outright
   corruption to be troubling.
   
   The obvious question that arises is: Can government do its job with
   respect to regulating Google in the public interest if it owes the
   company such a debt of gratitude?
   
   Google doesn't think its activities present an antitrust problem. It
   doesn't feel constrained from holding incredible amounts of data. But
   should Google be in a position to make that determination itself? How
   much influence is too much influence?
   
   Another potential conflict arises from the enormous amount of data that
   Google and the government each have stored on American citizens. Google
   recently acknowledged having mined the data of student users of its
   education apps, and has been accused repeatedly of violating user
   privacy in other contexts. An overly close partnership risks Google
   putting its data in the government's hands or gaining access to what
   the government has collected.
   
   When the federal government and a private company share the same
   worldview, get the same insights from the same groups of people, the
   policy drift can occur with nobody explicitly choosing the direction.
   It just seems like the right thing to do.
   
   And there is no doubt that Google's rise in Washington has coincided
   with public policy that is friendlier to the company.
   
   Most notably, Google has faced questions for years about exercising its
   market power to squash rivals, infringing on its users' privacy rights,
   favoring its own business affiliates in search results, and using
   patent law to create barriers to competition. Even Republican senators
   like Orrin Hatch have called out Google for its practices.
   
   In 2012, staff at the Federal Trade Commission recommended filing
   antitrust charges after determining that Google was engaging in
   anti-competitive tactics and abusing its monopoly. A staff report that
   was later leaked said Google's conduct "has resulted — and will result
   — in real harm to consumers and to innovation in the online search and
   advertising markets."
   
   The Wall Street Journal noted that Google's White House visits
   increased right around that time. And in 2013, the presidentially
   appointed commissioners of the FTC overrode their staff, voting
   unanimously not to file any charges.
   
   Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy,
   said the administration "has been a huge help" to Google both by
   protecting it from attempts to limit its market power and by blocking
   privacy legislation. "Google has been able to thwart regulatory
   scrutiny in terms of anti-competitive practices, and has played a key
   role in ensuring that the United States doesn't protect at all the
   privacy of its citizens and its consumers," Chester said.
   
   At a congressional hearing earlier this month, Sen. Richard Blumenthal,
   citing the possibility of consumer harm, called on the FTC to
   reconsider the kind of antitrust charges against Google recently filed
   in Europe.
   
   But Obama has argued that European regulators are being too aggressive
   toward Google out of a desire to protect companies that aren't as
   capable. "In defense of Google and Facebook, sometimes the European
   response here is more commercially driven than anything else," he told
   Re/code (archive.org copy) in February. "We have owned the internet. Our companies have
   created it, expanded it, perfected it, in ways they can't compete."
   
   
   On the left, you will find the names of White House officials who met
   with Google staff; on the right, the names of Google staff who met with
   White House officials. Hover over their names to see their titles and
   the number of meetings they attended. Hover over each meeting to find
   out who else was present. Source: Campaign for Accountability; Data
   Visualization: Accurat.it
   
   The accompanying visualization documents White House meetings involving
   employees from Google, Eric Schmidt's investment vehicle Tomorrow
   Ventures, and Civis Analytics, a company whose sole investor is Schmidt.
   
   Between January 2009 and October 2015, Google staffers gathered at the
   White House on 427 separate occasions. All told, 182 White House
   employees and 169 Google employees attended the meetings, with
   participation from almost every domestic policy and national security
   player in the West Wing.
   
   The frequency of the meetings has increased practically every year,
   from 32 in 2009 to 97 in 2014. In the first 10 months of 2015, which is
   as far as the study goes, there were 85 Google meetings.
   
   The most frequent visitor is Johanna Shelton, one of Google's top
   lobbyists in Washington — officially its director of public policy.
   Shelton attended meetings at the White House on 94 different occasions.
   
   The most Google-visited White House official is Todd Park, the U.S.
   chief technology officer from 2012 to 2014. In that short period, Park
   met with Google officials at the White House 22 times. Park's
   replacement, current Chief Technology Officer Megan Smith, was a former
   Google vice president. She had five White House meetings as a Google
   representative, then 10 Google meetings as a White House representative.
   
   The comprehensiveness of Google's outreach jumps out from the data. You
   would expect some contact between Google and top technology
   policymakers like Park, Smith, Aneesh Chopra, Susan Crawford, and Vivek
   Kundra. But Google's presence as an economic force and a communications
   tool gives the company an interest in virtually every aspect of public
   policy.
   
   Since 2009, Google has met with all three of Obama's directors of the
   National Economic Council (Larry Summers, Gene Sperling, and Jeffrey
   Zients), one chair of the Council of Economic Advisers (Austan
   Goolsbee), and another official who would become CEA chair (Jason
   Furman, who was then deputy director of the NEC).
   
   Company employees met with four Obama chiefs of staff (Rahm Emanuel,
   William Daley, Jack Lew, and Denis McDonough). Google also huddled with
   national security personnel like Michael McFaul (then at the NSC, later
   U.S. ambassador to Russia) and Tony Blinken (deputy national security
   adviser). Employees met with Heather Zichal, deputy assistant for
   energy and climate change, and White House science adviser John
   Holdren. They met with close counselors to the president like Pete
   Rouse, Valerie Jarrett, John Podesta, and Dan Pfeiffer. They met with
   then-communications director Jennifer Palmieri. And they met with the
   president of the United States 21 separate times — five times in the
   first term and 16 times in the first two-plus years of the second term.
   Even Jill Biden and Michelle Obama have taken meetings with Google
   employees.
   
   The visitor logs only show the individuals in attendance at the
   meetings, not what the meetings were about. But it's possible to make
   some educated guesses. The presence of Johanna Shelton at 94 meetings
   suggests that a significant chunk were devoted to lobbying on various
   Google priorities. But there are hundreds of other meetings in the logs
   that point to more of a consulting role.
   
   
   Each line represents an individual's move between Google and U.S.
   government agencies, congressional staff, or federal-level political
   campaigns. You can filter by direction to see only transfers from or to
   Google; by sub-organization; and by year. To reset the graphic, click
   anywhere that's not highlighted. Source: Campaign for Accountability;
   Data Visualization: Accurat.it
   
   The "revolving door" data, displayed in the above visualization,
   reveals 55 cases of individuals moving from positions at Google into
   the federal government, and 197 individuals moving from positions
   inside the government to jobs at Google. The data includes positions at
   firms that Eric Schmidt owns or controls — Civis Analytics, The
   Groundwork, and Tomorrow Ventures — along with two law firms and three
   lobbying firms that have represented Google. On the government side,
   staffers at Obama for America and a handful of other political
   campaigns were included.
   
   The data includes individuals from Google appointed to government
   boards while maintaining their positions at the tech firm. Google board
   member John Doerr was appointed to the President's Council on Jobs and
   Competitiveness in February 2011. Eric Schmidt has been part of the
   President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology since 2009.
   He was also more recently appointed to lead the Defense Innovation
   Advisory Board at the Pentagon, which occurred outside the time frame
   of the data.
   
   But the bulk of the moves involved job changes. Google alums work in
   the departments of State, Defense, Commerce, Education, Justice, and
   Veterans Affairs. One works at the Federal Reserve, another at the U.S.
   Agency for International Development. The highest number — 29 — moved
   from Google into the White House. The State Department had the next
   highest with just five. The moves from Google to government got more
   frequent in the later Obama years; 11 occurred in 2014 and 16 in 2015,
   after only 18 in the entire first term.
   
   On the other side, former staffers from 36 different areas across the
   government have found a willing employer at Google since 2009. Johanna
   Shelton was a senior counsel on the House Energy and Commerce
   Telecommunications Subcommittee. Joshua Wright, a former commissioner
   of the Federal Trade Commission, rotated into a top position at Wilson
   Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, one of the law firms that has represented
   Google.
   
   Nineteen researchers and scientists at NASA, senior analysts at the
   Federal Reserve Bank of New York, an "information assurance expert" at
   the National Security Agency, and 32 separate officials with the Obama
   for America campaign found their way to Google.
   
   Former employees of 12 of the 15 cabinet agencies (Energy, Justice,
   Defense, Education, State, Treasury, Commerce, Agriculture, Labor, HHS,
   Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs) now work at the tech company
   or its affiliates, led by 16 former Pentagon staffers. The exodus
   ramped up in the second term, hitting 41 in 2014, compared to just six
   in 2009.
   
   Seven individuals made a full revolution through the revolving door,
   either going from Google to government and back again, or from
   government to Google and back again. This includes Julia Duncan, who
   left her job as White House personnel officer to go work in Google's
   finance department in 2013, and a year later moved to the State
   Department's Office of Food Security.
   
   Nathan Parker, a staff software engineer at Google, did a stint in the
   U.S. Digital Service for four months before returning to Google HQ in
   Mountain View. Austin Lau was a planner and tech lead for Google India,
   then became a foreign service officer at the State Department before
   returning to Google to work on social impact partnerships.
   
   A few individuals are listed twice: The aforementioned Mikey Dickerson
   moved from Google to the Obama campaign, back to Google, and then to
   the U.S. Digital Service, for example.
   
   
   Illustration by The Intercept. Photo: Shutterstock
   
   The government and Google shared engineers, lawyers, scientists,
   communications specialists, executives, and even board members. Google
   has achieved a kind of vertical integration with the government: a true
   public-private partnership.
   
   Ex-Google staffers may not be directly involved in setting policy that
   affects Google, but they have access to decision-makers. They maintain
   ties to their former bosses. And Google employees with government
   experience have a network of friends and colleagues at federal
   agencies, House and Senate offices, the West Wing, and practically
   everywhere else.
   
   Methodology:
   
   The chart depicting White House visits is based on meetings between
   White House officials and employees of Google or companies controlled
   by Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Google's parent company, since
   President Obama took office in 2009 through October 2015. The data has
   been compiled from White House visitor records.
   
   Large gatherings, such as state dinners and White House tours were
   excluded. Names were cross-referenced with lists of Google employees.
   
   The jobs visualization was compiled from publicly available information
   including LinkedIn profiles, news sources, lobby disclosure records,
   and OpenSecrets.org data. Analysts gathered data by searching for
   profiles mentioning Google and terms related to government jobs. The
   data includes any job changes that occurred during Obama's presidency,
   as well as moves from Obama's campaign to Google in 2008.
   
   CONTACT THE AUTHOR:
   David Dayen
   ✉david.dayen@gmail.com
               @ddayen
   
   ADITTIONAL CREDITS:
   Research: Andrea Jones, John Thomason and Margot Williams. "

[MikeWB]