Thank you...

The way to get around that is to search for the "Labor Force Participation Rate". http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS113...

Uh, lets focus here...we are talking about the public announcement made once a month with a magical number that is expressed as "the unemployment number". Now, what you may know or I know, does not matter a squat, in that we do NOT impact the society that that little number does. That is the issue here, not whether I can read it or not. Just because you know the mountain is about to erupt, does not help the other 4 million living on it, and the government telling you it's ok, is not necessarily a good thing either. The idea of Fake News extends across all media, and the point is, our government has been practising this for a long, long time. I agree that if you are informed, questioning, and do not accept everything that comes out as truth, you are a lot better off...

If You cannot tell what the true unemployment rate is, Perhaps you need to be more specific. in the BLS there are more than 40 different Sets of statistics based on age, ethnicity, region, etc. So, when you say you can't tell what the "true" unemployment rate is that is probably because you haven't asked the right question. Just because it is beyond your understanding does not make it BS. We may be using the wrong unemployment number to show how you think unemployment should be reported, but that is your opinion, not that the BLS is BS. The number is there. Just look it up.

BLaramie, you are indeed free to have you view of things. Fake News in my definition is anytime someone manipulates data and then announces it as "truth" and generates results accordingly. I can not, from the jobs report, tell you really what the "true" unemployment rate is, it all depends on your definition. Yet stocks rise, fall, interest rates change and the financial world reacts according to it. That seems pretty fake to me...

Nice try. But there are facts. Slanting something and attempting to claim it as a fact can be detected, checked and corrected. But it is still slanting. The discussion here is fake news. It has a strict definition. A story known to be false by the originator but nevertheless portrayed as real news. that is an entirely different thing from slanted or distorted news which is at least based on some sort of event or fact. I'm not arguing that slanted/distorted news isn't malicious and even dangerous. But it is a different issue than fake news. If you are an objectivist, you must believe that words matter, and the definition of those words are important to make language useful. Trying to stuff all of your grievances about the corrupt state of the government, the incompetence of the MSM to do real journalism and the idiocy of those who do not subscribe to your particular beliefs into this issue dilutes each of those arguments. It simply becomes ranting. Fake news is very specific and something that can be tracked and the purveyors of such garbage can be brought to task. This is not even a free speech issue. Yelling Fire in the theater is an example of fake news. If there is no fire, you have committed a serious grievance for which you bear responsibility. If there is one thing that we all agree on as Objectivists, it is that we must be responsible for our actions. So if Dan Rather wants to blather his slanted opinion that's one thing. But it's probably not fake news. Slanted and distorted perhaps, but not fake. Please let's at least agree that words matter.

Good points.

Intent is certainly the driving force. The misuse od information to be twisted into "facts" to support a political argument, is a foundation of our dysfunction today. It obviates opinions, as no one regards them as worth discussion, so they move to "facts" to support their arguments, and so we have no real debate.

One or both. I am always suspicious of statistics.

"can be used in so many ways in order to prove or disprove the very same thing."
If reality is real, though, at least one of those proofs has a flaw in it.

It seems to me that you are driving at intent and I regard distortion and slanting in that sense. "Fake" certainly contains intent. An opinion is just that so long as it is clearly stated to be an opinion. It is when the opinion is passed off as fact that distortion and slanting come into the mix. To me, these may be even more dangerous since they are more subtle, even insidious.

There you go. If people are not aware of the ability to manipulate facts as "truth" then they never know they are being lied to...

When I was in college, I seem to remember a book "How to lie with statistics". Seems like the politico/media class has memorized this book and made it their playbook.

Or, maybe, "Idioacracy"(sp). The feds have been screwing with the numbers on everything since forever. Just another example of how far they will go to cover their butts.

Hello, Circuit Guy:
Also - you used the magic word "STATISTIC." It is a tribute to the ingenuity of man, that that word can be used in so many ways in order to prove or disprove the very same thing. I've seen the same statistic used to prove or disprove the same argument.

That is very true, and it may be an effort by mainstream media to illegitimatize news so that only their "truth" is heard.

A fine distinction. The problem is there are now media outlets (some mainstream) that are practicing this to a degree or another. The wording of a story is as much slanting, as to lead to falsehood, hence "fake". Both sides practice it, this was just an example of how government "data" is often slanted to fact, when it is really fiction. If you want to get wrapped up in real slanted news, go look at articles on "global warming".

Exactly doc!

Exactly, and I love it when management uses "ZBB" to decide what needs doing, and have no idea what the impact is...

Maybe, but the point was the our societal system has adopted these things as "truth" and report them as such. Most people probably would not even know how to find the real report, or be able to digest it. Yet a large chunk of the financial market responds to it. Therefor, it is still "fake news" as much as any, since it is whatever the news reporting (or government) wants it to be. Your points are valid, but you need to consider how it is being used overall.

The article says "numbers can be framed in various ways to tell wildly different stories." This is true until someone digs into what numbers really mean. Mr. Udland assumes people consuming the numbers understand them as well as a child who first hears the words. This is bad for many reasons:
1. It comes close to saying there can be no real news, no reality, just "framing".
2. It's victim mentality to complain about a statistic without offering an alternative. e.g. looking at reports from payroll and benefit management companies like Paychex and TASC.
3. It focuses on more negative ways to look at statistics, not positive actions you could take such as taking an investment position or pursuing a business strategy.
The victim reader will read this and learn the gov't is lying to him, there's no way to get to the truth, and this explains why his life sucks. The go-getter will ignore it, find a way to help others for money, do a good job, have more customers than she can handle, and then actually CREATE one of those jobs that can be framed one way or another.

Because fake means it isn't real. It's a Fake. Distortion or Slanting something is quite different. Saying an economic statistic or report distorts the situation is an opinion, and perhaps a fact if it is in error. Disputing what the BLS reports as being slanted or distorting the true level of unemployment, as an example, is an argument that has merit. A news story that has Podesta and Clinton running a child porn sex ring out of the basement of a Pizzeria (which does not even have a basement) is malicious fake news. Forget for the moment that it debases Podesta and Clinton unfairly. It exposed a citizen to a threat of violence. It has no place in the proper discourse in a democracy. There are broad latitudes given to comedians and parody publications like The Onion. But there should be no quarter given to idiots that make up this stuff and try to pass it off to any segment of the electorate as news. It is not. Pure and simple. You may think BLS is BS. That's fine. But no quarter to fake news deliberately placed into what is in fact a very serious matter - our democracy and our freedom.

Why would one consider distorted or slanted news not to be fake?

Fake news and distorted or slanted news are two very different things. You can use statistics to prove almost anything, but that does not make statistics fake. It may make one statistic (the employment report) worthless to anyone other than real experts, but that still is not fake. It's just that the average reader isn't knowledgeable enough to interpret the facts. Fake news on the other hand is a news story that is neither factual nor parody/comedic. Fake news is a real issues with very dire consequences. See the article yesterday about the man at the Pizzeria in DC who burst in w/ a shotgun because the restaurant was reported in a known fake news story to be involved in a Podesta/Clinton child sex ring. Fortunately, no one was injured (although the weapon was discharged). That sort of stuff is the real problem of fake news. Someone will think it is real. Let's keep the difference between fake news and distorted truths separate. They are not the same problem.

Again I'm reminded of Gladstone's statement, "There are lies, there are damned lies, and then there are statistics!"