Researchers: Fake News Did Not Alter 2016 Presidential Election Results

STANFORD, Calif. — As social media sites like Facebook and Snapchat move to eliminate “fake news” reports from their sites, researchers from Stanford and New York Universities say Americans can be sure of one thing: the phenomenon did not affect the results of the 2016 presidential election.

Fake news did not affect the presidential election in 2016, researchers say.

The study investigates the influence that fake news may have had on President Trump’s victory.

NYU economics professor Hunt Allcott and Stanford economics professor Matthew Gentzkow led the research. The pair ran a series of tests to determine which fake news articles were circulated, how much of it was circulated, and the amount of voters that believed the stories to be true.

Once they gathered an assortment of fake news stories, Gentzkow and Allcott used fact-checking resources in order to verify that these stories were fake. They then conducted a post-election survey that consisted of 1,200 voters.

Participants were asked what their primary or “most important” source of 2016 election news was. Next, they were presented with a list of true and false news stories, and asked two questions concerning each individual story. The first was whether or not the participant remembered seeing the story. The second question asked whether or not they believed the story.

Although fake news stories in Trump’s favor were shared more times (30 million compared to 8 million for Hillary Clinton), the authors of the report had determined that these stories still did not reach enough voters nationwide to change the election results.

“The average American saw and remembered 0.92 pro-Trump fake news stories and 0.23 pro-Clinton fake news stories, with just over half of those who recalled seeing fake news stories believing them,” the authors write. But, “for fake news to have changed the outcome of the election, a single fake article would need to have had the same persuasive effect as 36 television campaign ads.”

The observers’ work also revealed that a majority of voters were capable of accurately deciding whether or not a news story was true. They concluded that an insignificant number of American voters casted their final decision based on false information.

“In summary, our data suggest that social media were not the most important source of election news, and even the most widely circulated fake news stories were seen by only a small fraction of Americans,” the study concludes.

Comments

  1. Well of course it didn’t, we don’t give a rats ass about them, only go to their worthless sites to beat them senseless in the comments section and the ones that have no comments are shredded on blogs that do. They control nothing, America’s patience with snowflakes and the life support system of fake news is over. The country is red, the blue areas had best STFU and or get out of the way as we didn’t behave like mindless single celled organism’s when DUH WON won twice. Did I protest? Why yes I did, I went to work every G D day.

    1. How about “Hillary has a 92% chance of winning”? Hillary voters (actually non-voters) fell for this fake news story, big time! How can the claim that fake news stories were insignificant be taken seriously? If Hillary wasn’t your gal, rejoice, as most will learn nothing from history. There will be future elections.

      1. HRC actively DECIDED to promote the phony poll leads, her campaign wanted an MSNBC host removed for daring to question why no events were securing her “wall”. She lost, get over it, quit crying wolf.

      2. The fake news came from ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN and MSNBC. Saying Hillary is ahead does 3 things, depresses Trump supporters, lifts the spirits of Hillary supporters and gives the MSM plausible deniability. IMHO.

    2. Fake news was spread like manure all over TV, the Internet and newspapers. Hillary was always in the lead, she was going to trounce Trump, Hillary would be the first woman president, etc. The average American didn’t believe that drivel. We were too smart to be taken in by the lies of CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, MSNBC, NPR and the news papers. They are still publishing fake news and we still don’t believe it. The media just doesn’t get it that they were spanked hard by the average American and we aren’t going to believe anything they say, print or publish!

      1. Same page, Yarn. Thank you. Do we believe MSM fake news changed the election? Not really. Fundamentally, this fake news effect is unknowable because after-the-fact sampling and modeling has serious limitations. However, “Americans not believing” it a very important topic unto itself: How about Hillary’s collapse at the 9/11 ceremonies, or during the debates “all 17 intelligence agree: the Russians did it”, or my favorite “today the FBI is re-opening the investigation into her private e-mail server”? There are many reasons for Hillary’s defeat, some based on truths, but just too many falsehoods for reasonable people to accept in total.

    3. This supports what my common sense told me all along. I don’t know a single person who changed their vote based on the Hillary or Podesta e-mail revelations. The Hillary voters were going to vote for her come hell or high water. The Trump voters were either voting for Trump for his policy stances OR because he was the “Anybody but Hillary” candidate.

      1. I think the argument is the “anybody but hillary” voters were swayed by all the emails and other bull. Otherwise, why did they hate her guts so much (you’re separating these folks from Trump voters). And many were disaffected/apathetic/disgusted by both sides. Probably because they believed the nonsense. And those people went third party or didn’t vote which also denied Hillary many votes.

        1. There was no bull. The F.B.I. director clearly stated that she violated the law, but not to an extent that he believed a prosecutor would pursue. That wasn’t his call, but that’s what happened. Then the Russians hacked her email, exposing the truth behind her campaign. People don’t like her because she’s a liar, a crook, and a two-faced politician. With Trump, they knew EXACTLY what they were getting.

        2. Hillary was not an unknown candidate prior to 2015 when she decided to run. Many of us who were in the ABC camp, “anything but clinton” were looking for alternatives all along. Very few were swayed by emails and recent BS.

        3. Hillary lost big time bc we had enough of her and Obama. She had her chance when her husband ran this country with his pants down!

    4. That was beautiful. ‘What he said’. Long live Milo, Nigel Farage, and all the other Truth-sayers.

    5. A fake news story about fake news, how quaint. Zero verifiable data was provided, no link to the study so we can read the data and the sources for ourselves. I hope they didn’t use Snopes to “fact-check” the fake news. Goebbels would be proud.

      1. Exactly–this “study” continues to promote the same exact FAKE news and slant on certain events.
        First, the FBI investigation was re-opened, not because of “Russian Hacking” or fake news, but because Anthony Weiner’s laptop with the 30,000 scrubbed Clinton emails was recovered. It’s simple, in any case when new evidence is found, investigators open the files back up and take another look.
        Secondly, the entire mainstream media and the university polls were all slanting coverage to try and discourage the middle-America voters with a “don’t waste your time voting, Hillary is winning in a landslide” nationwide propaganda campaign.
        Also, this study says that roughly 80% of fake news favored Trump–I’d call BS on this as everything from Mother Jones, Salon, Huff Post to WaPo posted multiple fake stories about Trump and constantly took his comments or things he did decades ago out of context.
        If people are turning to alt-media, it is simply because the MSM is repulsively and openly biased. They no longer even try and hide their disdain for Trump, or Christians, for traditional families, morals or the middle class.

    6. Still lost the popular vote though, cause the majority of Americans aren’t aren’t as easily conned as you are Jess.

      1. Bill Clinton lost the 1992 “popular vote” by 14 million votes, and he lost the “popular vote” in 1996 by 1.5 million votes.

          1. It’s not a “total lie”. Bill Clinton had more people voting against him than for him. Out of 104 million ballots cast (give or take) Clinton received almost 45 million.

      2. The “majority of Americans” sure didn’t vote HRC! Add 3rd party votes to DJT’s… So sick of the “popular vote” b.s.- it was a US Presidential election, not a “popularity contest”… Somebody put a dang tiara on her head & let’s move on already!

        1. Good point, I’m libertarian and voted G.Johnson– but if there were only 2 options, I NEVER would have voted Hillary ( nor would any Libertarian).
          Hillary is the ultimate, deep-state/establishment candidate with her corporotocracy slant, her Neo-con warhawk attitudes ( we’d probably already have troops in Ukraine ready to start WW3 if Hillary had won), her phony foundation taking billions as political bribes from countries trying to buy her favor ( like the Saudis who donated $20 million-obvious corruption). Hillary is dirty–these are FACTS. Ask any of the tens of thousands of Haitians living in those tent cities still while Hill and Bill gave their donors the relief funds to build resorts on the other side of the island from the earthquake-also FACT.
          The biggest fake news was the MSM’s intentional obfuscation about MASSIVE Clinton scandals and corruption while digging through 10 to 20 year old soundbites to find Trump speaking crudely among the guys…I hope Trump lives long enough to clean up or bring to light a lot of the CFR’s and globalists treason against the American people.

      3. It wasn’t a popularity contest! Somebody please throw a dang tiara on her head & let’s get down to working on the country… since HRC’s feelings being hurt after loosing seems strangely a concern instead of moving forward

      4. Meaningless statistic.
        Trump won the majority of electoral college votes, which is what they both sought. He won the majority of states, the majority of counties, and the majority of congressional districts. His party won the majority of governorships and state legislatures.
        Bill Clinton’s wife did’t even win a majority in the popular vote, she had a plurality. Same as Bill. Twice.

      5. Trump’s guy who ran the campaign (young guy out of Texas), was on the radio. He discussed the plan, it was to win the electoral vote. Remove the illegal and dead people’s vote and Trump would have won the popular vote.

      6. Why do losers have to live onto the dream of the popular vote? You lost! Washington Post has a study that was proven out that 800,000 illegals voted for Hillary. That number is probably low. On top of that, we have the electoral college for a good reason. When you look at the map of the U.S., most of it is red now. Only a handful of coastal states are blue. How many seats have you guys picked up over the last 8 years? Hmmmm…. You have lost over 1000 seats nationwide, most governorships, state bodies, House, Senate, and now the President are a rebuke to your ideologies. So you might want to ask why you guys have lost so much if you are so popular!

      7. Really? The urban concentration of votes in SoCal, DC-Boston corridor and Chicago that gave Hillary the vast majority of her votes are not easily conned? Actually they are much MORE easily conned. And shepherded to the polls by city machines. And fed fear steady diet of fear about loss of rights, funding, Nazis, etc. That was fake news and agit-prop at its best.

      8. Hillary did not come even close to getting a majority of eligible voters. Nearly 100 million voters did not vote…. but she did get 800,000 illegible foreign votes, the cemetery vote, and the repeat voters who voted more than 1 x, or when the machines switched the votes to her favor. That her events were so unattended begs the question… where did all the votes come from?

    7. Facebook will save us from Fake News? Please they are part of the propaganda problem by calling alternative news “Fake News”…

    8. Today a former senior adviser to Obama from ’09-’11 proposed
      several ways to remove Pres. Trump including a military coup.
      This nation has lost 6 presidents murdered to Rothschild Bank
      directed and paid assassins. This is historical Fact.
      The 1st. amendment permits Free Speech, but not Treasonous
      speech suggesting a siting president be removed in a Coup.
      I suggest this former ‘presidential adviser’ be arrested…

      1. The reason the left is in such a state of hysteria is that they truly are afraid that President Trump will deliver on all his promises. So far he is. If he is highly successful, we will have him for 8 years. It could be the beginning of the transformation of all future candidates. Trump is going to make the repubs do things that they haven’t been accustomed to doing. He’s going to make them stand up for their principles by forcing their hand. This president will change the way Washington thinks. Watch and see.

    9. When I watched the explosion of liberal outcry on Facebook when the buzzfeed thing was posted, I coined the following thought: Liberal pigs at the MSM trough: lappin’ it up and fartin’ it out.

    10. Anyone who believes that fake news had any outcome on the election would never admit that they themselves had ever fallen for a fake news story. They automatically assume that everyone who is not them are too stupid to decipher the difference. Liberalism is a disease and this is one of it’s many symptoms

      1. Yup. MSM operates on the premise that it’s easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled. The instant a lie is believed, they will defend the lie instead of admitting they were fooled.

    11. Sounds like a fake study to me. Of course it affected the election, just not in the way their preconceived conclusion thought. It was the BACKLASH from the fake news that helped drive people to Trump.

    12. This was fake news. Most or All of today’s University Professors are liberal and publish stuff full of spin.

    13. Yes, but besides those click-bait ad-link sites that clearly are joke commerce sites, the so-called respectable mainstream sources were the real fake news in that their intention was purely political and since the election they’ve doubled down with no sense of irony. The collusion (Wikileaks, D.C. Leaks, Project Veritas) of the MSM/Polls with the DNC and Obama administration was the real story which of course the MSM didn’t cover – duh. The reporting which became indistinguishable from editorializing was pure propaganda and what they didn’t report was even more scandalous. Pravda on LSD.

    14. And, like many, I eagerly await the day that anyone, ANYONE will give just ONE example of what “fake news” was supposedly put out to sway the election. Even the author of this article doesn’t cite any!!!

    1. Yes its a fake study conducted by some blind idiots to appease the ignorant. They can not see a tree because of the forest all around them. Fake news was so rampant it pissed off enough people to cause Hillary to lose. Since this does not fit the template of the news media they shopped for a fake study to support their fake ideas.

      1. While I agree the study provides no real value in this whole thing, if you think Hillary lost due to “Fake News,” her gender, or a sudden surge in deplorable racist bigots, you have lost perspective on the whole damned affair.

        1. I’m pretty sure Gary was being sarcastic. His point is that all the anti-Trump, pro-Hillary fake news in the Main Stream Media pissed off the average voters enough to get out and vote for Trump.

          There is something to that. I don’t buy that blatantly false stories circulating on social media had an impact on the election, but I can certainly buy that the average American living in flyover country was motivated to go vote in part in retaliation for the obvious bias and condescension of the MSM.

          1. Nail meet head. I have refused to watch the alphabet news for over ten years, sick of those a$$ holes looking down their nose at me.

        2. Crawl back into your basement, snowflake. Hillary lost because progressivism is dead. If you want to talk fake news, talk about Hillary’s 92% chance of winning, Islam is peace, no illegals voted, and Russians changing the election outcome. People like you are the reason progressives will never win again. America is sick of your type.

      2. Right, because NYU is a known bastion of conservatism and and thus has a vested interest in placating conservatives. Derp. Try not to hurt yourself stumbling around your shoebox of a studio apartment today cupcake, and don’t forget to breathe! inhale AND exhale!

      3. You guys have an excuse for everything don’t you?!? LOL If the dem party is so popular and she lost solely because of fake news…. Why have you guys lost SO many seats nationwide over the last 8 years? Please answer that. Most of the country now is red. You guys lost over 200 counties this election alone. Over 8 years, you lost 1000 seats nationwide. Most state legislators are repubs, most governors are repub, the House, Senate, and now the President! You guys are almost non-existent. Why? Fake news? Nope!

  2. Looks like the study mostly dealt with positive inaccurate stories rather than the negative. I’m sure the study is a good study but it doesn’t justify the conclusion that fake news did not impact the outcome of the election.

    1. If either candidate had a significantly larger share of negative fake news stories floating about, it was Trump. So…there goes your narrative.

    2. Actually, the study appears to indicate that “anti-Trump” stories were considered “pro-Clinton”, and “anti-Clinton” stories were counted as “pro-Trump.” Also, most people on social networks primarily have a cohort with basically similar positions – that is most of the pro-Trump fake news was spread in cohorts which were already pro-Trump, and similarly for pro-Clinton fake news. The conclusions are quite reasonable as a result.

    3. If you were to make the claim that fake news did have an effect on the election, then _that_ claim would need to be demonstrated, however. Until then, we assume that the claim is not true. I’ve seen rather a lot of “real” news making what are in effect entirely unsubstantiated claims about fake news.

    4. I think this is a fake comment.

      Regardless it still does not sway or influence mebfrom being able to see that HRC was simply a terrible candidate and a serial liar, who, like the whole of the Democrat party is completely out of touch with the working class.

    5. I think one major factor that did affect the election was the WikiLeaks dumps, which were most certainly NOT fake news.
      First the DNC dump where the rigging of the nomination and collusion of the press in helping Clinton was exposed. Americans don’t, by and large, suffer cheats well…
      The Podesta emails were also important. The irony is that Podesta claims on his resume to be something of a cyber security expert. That he fell for a phishing scam is laughable. His original password was P@ssw0rd…

  3. Most people pay no attention to ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, MSNBC—the fake news sites—because they know what they’re going to get and not get. The genuine news sites are off the radar and we look at those.

  4. Another “duh” result from a study. I worked in the media business for years, and I will tell you “fake news” is 1% fake and 99% spin. Of course the 1% fake didn’t affect the results. It’s the 99% spin you have to watch out for.

    1. Exactly. And whether the underlying story was true or not, it’s pretty clear that in this election cycle about 99% of the spin was pro-Clinton and anti-Trump.

    1. Democrats & ‘progressives’ simply refuse to accept that they lost. Many are so entrenched in their bubble of hatred for Donald Trump that they believe its worth taking the country and its institutions to the brink of civil war in order to regain power. Something in the liberal mind cannot accept defeat or cannot accept the idea that their philosophy is in terminal decline.

  5. Now this is FAKE news:

    “Although fake news stories in Trump’s favor were shared more times (30 million compared to 8 million for Hillary Clinton)”.

  6. HRC lost because she was fake.

    Her numerous campaign reboots and re-introductions were necessary because she is fundamentally dishonest and contrived.

    Meanwhile, Trump is either unaware or afraid to reveal what he is thinking 24/7- warts and all.

    The nation chose candid imperfection over smooth dishonesty.

    1. @youdude60
      Well said.

      I for one did not pick Trump because of any news story ‘positive’ or ‘negative’, but because at 56 years old I’ve seen enough Dem and Republican iterations to recognize a failed system, and just wanted someone who would truly blow the system up.

      So far so good…

  7. So, if ABC / WAPO publish the results of a survey where Democrats were over-represented, is that fake news? I’d say so, but it certainly wasn’t reported that way.

    Specifically, I’m referring to their polls a few weeks ago where they reported that the country was upset at the Trump transition. It seems that the respondents were 45% Democrat, 30% independent, and 25% Republican even though the country is split roughly into thirds.

  8. Facebook is still full of people arguing using points from fake news sites. They believe that crap. How can that not have affected the election?

  9. FAKE news….that reallly is true….and entertaining…..
    Feb 2nd 2017…Ground Hog day reminds me of the day NYC Mayor Bla killed the ground hog and the weather ….and illegal
    corruption has continued for more than six weeks……Hey Bla, get out of the the pubs and do your job…..you skof-law…

  10. The article does not address the morality of fake news, merely was it effective or not. Fake news are 99% attack ads and should not be looked at as pro or con, but merely fake. No one could say anything bad about hillary that was not easily believable due to her transparent fakiness.

  11. Considering that the coined term, “Fake News”, wasn’t even part of our trendy vocabulary until the very end of the 2016 election cycle, could it be that this study, this Charles Hartwell post itself, are…”Fake News”?

  12. I think the study should have been directed at what appears to be a serious mental defect in the sycophants who, when faced with a fact, turn and run, think really hard about how to neutralize the fact threat, and then turn to media and social media in order to fire the shot.

    In a world where white is black, and black is white, even a fool always knows where mainstream media stands. In fact, you could write their news stories just out of the ‘comments’ sections of many sources of daily news.

  13. It didn’t really effect the election because the population has come to realize that the MSM are liars and propagandists for the Washington Criminal Mafia and nobody trusts or believes them anymore.

    We on the right have our sources we go to for news (not the MSM) and those on the left have their sources as well, neither are going to convince the other.

    Not sure why we even call the networks MSM anymore because they are no longer mainstream and no longer trusted.

  14. The first thing you must do when you read an article is think, “Does this sound too good (or bad) to be true?” Then get off your duff and do a little research. If you can’t find a trusted site to back up the story you have been fed, chances are it is a hoax.

    1. But what is a “trusted site”? The mainstream media are in the tank for the Democrat Party and its candidates and officeholders. Everything they put out is spun to make their boys and girls look good, and Republicans look bad. If I read a story from any known mainstream media source, I read it with the thought that it has been written to have left-wing propaganda value.

  15. The fake news was all the push-polling that had the Benghazi Butcher with a 12 point lead right up until election day. The MSM have be the curators of fake news since before Kronkite.

  16. The biggest factor was the repulsion of Hillary Clinton’s personality. Her numbers were much better until her campaign began to run commercials with her speaking.
    I can point to every drop in her polling to broad exposure to her vituperative voice.

    1. Yes, if what we needed was a President that we could lock in the closet with her server and never speak, she would have been the perfect candidate.

  17. Uh huh. Ask any professor friend what they think about “studies”.

    One of my favorite stock phrases in an argument is “STUDIES HAVE SHOWN!!!”

  18. I don’t agree, I think if not for the lying Fake News like CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, NBC, NPR. Hillary would have lost by much more. But knowing how hard the fake news as part of the opposition propagandist branch of her team, they got her a lot of votes and were able to cover up a lot of her criminal activities being known. The only thing good I can say is at least CNN admitted it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkXkS70Co-o

  19. So if hitlery won, it would have been because of fake news? This story is proof liberals just don’t get it and never will.

    Liberalism is a mental disorder!

    1. According to liberals, Hillary “won” the elections through “winning” the popular vote. And that, btw, is a fake news story. Talk about messed up!

  20. Yes, the fake news tried to help the evil witch win, but they failed to affect the outcome and Trump won anyway. We don’t need and article to see this.

  21. When will everyone learn that two of the most prominent reasons for President Trump’s victory were:
    Hillary Clinton
    Barak Obama

  22. The main effect of the overwhelming bias towards HRC in the media that I glaringly noticed, regardless of its veracity or serious lack thereof, was to further compel me NOT to cast my vote for her (or for anyone/anything supported by the more reactionary liberalists, for that matter).

  23. I’ll lay down money that most of the people who believed crap like PizzaGate were not voting for Hillary in the first place. Ditto people who voted against Trump. These stories work when people want to believe them.

    I’m also willing to bet that all the news about the DNC and Hillary working to stop Bernie did far more damage, actively encouraging people who might have voted for her to vote for Steyn, Johnson or just leaving the ballot blank (as happened to a large degree in Michigan). Unfortunately, while that news was not acquired in an ethical manner, no one has claimed that it was fake.

  24. There was a lot of fake news in this election cycle; like “Trump can’t win”. Americans saw threw the lies. Are these “fake News” sites (NYT, CNN, MSNBC, …) included in the survey?

  25. Sorry Charley i disagree.

    Hiliar was never fit for office. Her bungling of Benghazi, the email server, Pay to play at Clinton Foundation and DNC scandals – and subsequent coverup attempts disqualify her for any public office.

    She is just another Soros puppet – aimed at bringing this country down for their own financial benefit.

  26. The fake News most certainly affected the Election, if the truth had been told about Hillary I’m certain that President Trump would have won the popular vote as well. Of course, the Fake News orgs had a vested interest in electing their chosen candidate, they have been touting her for decades.

  27. Almost all “news” stories and history generally deviate from the actual truth of the occurrence to a greater or lesser degree. History especially, because it’s written by either the winners or those with an angle.

    The only truth is one’s own perspective.

  28. TRANSLATION FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL MORONS: THE LEFT DOESN’T HAVE ANYTHING BUT FAKE NEWS SITES…..they are in big trouble kids….look for some new snowflake apparel so you don’t stick out. THOSE 33 MILLION VIEWERS THAT TUNED IN TO WATCH WHO TRUMP PICKED FOR THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE OUT ON THE STREETS TO WIPE THEM CLEAN OF THE FKN SNOT NOSED LEFTIST TRAITORS…..GUARANFKNTEED. DEMOCRATS: THEY NAME IS TREASON. AMERICA: leftist socialist traitors are still trying to steal your election and will do anything to succeed. They are trying to convince others to break the law, insult our constitution, and disrespect the process and the actions of the President you elected to implement your wishes. THEY ARE FOMENTING CIVIL UNREST AND USING VIOLENCE AND THREATS OF VIOLENCE. ….THEY MUST BE STOPPED NOW. DEMAND THEY BE ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE……THEY ARE TREACHEROUS IN THE EXTREME ….and when Americans find out the extent of the treachery the Democrat criminals in congress they will punish them in a way they will be able to bear. I am a plain warner …..YOU NEED TO BE READY.

  29. It was the real news which killed Hillary. That constant barrage of polls and Left Wing pundants (even some Right Wingers) which showed her winning by a large margin. How Trump didn’t stand a chance. That sort of thing probably caused many potential Hillary voters to stay home and not even bother voting. If she was going to win in such a huge landslide, she didn’t need their vote. How wrong they all were. They were actually trying to discourage Trump voters and that strategy backfired on them big time.

    And the emails did have an effect on those sitting on the fence. They may not have all voted for Trump, but they sure didn’t vote for the lying, double crossing, in-it-for-herself Hildabeast.

  30. People didn’t need the internet to understand what a heinous witch Hillary is. They knew it before Al Gore invented it.

  31. Donald Trump campaigned on an agenda. Hillary Clinton campaigned on an attack. Americans were smart to see through it.

  32. actually the lame stream “media” wall-to-wall fake news DID have an effect on me: I became active and got several people who weren’t going to vote to get out and vote for Trump .

  33. We get our news from multiple sources these days, and I don’t think FaceBook is considered a “source” by most people. There is a plethora of sites dedicated to news right at your fingertips and most people who vote are not swayed by fake news. In the end, a Presidential campaign always comes down to issues, and Hillary was just on the wrong side of the argument.

  34. What was the precise criterion used to determine what is “fake news”?

    The reality is that “fake news” is a term that the corporate media and the government use to describe anything that questions the official narrative of events.

  35. There is fake news. then there is unreported or under-reported news. Such as Bengazi, exposed e-mails, Clinton Foundation.etc., etc. etc.

  36. If the fake news wasn’t swaying the elections then they only logical reason they are so worked up about it is that it actually is NOT fake news.

  37. Such a Red Herring! No one claimed Fake News had anything to do with the election outcome. This will no doubt come as a surprise to you because of your preconception that there must have been an outside force that contributed to the defeat of your invincible candidate, so you naturally completely missed the reason she was defeated: She was defeated because she failed to gain the support of the electorate that judged her opponent was a better candidate by comparison of the candidates’ positions on the specific issues of immigration, national security, economic policy, foreign policy, health care, environment and education. Bonus: There is no need for a study to prove it; the election was the study.

  38. Of course fake news affected the election. Fake news affects our lives every day since I can remember (back to 1975 anyway). Dan Rather was one of the PIONEERS of fake news, but the roster of its forked-tongued purveyors is long, long, long.

  39. “NYU economics professor Hunt Allcott and Stanford economics professor Matthew Gentzkow led the research.”
    AKA Fake News

    Hey Professors, no one believes the lies you publish with your jerry-rigged “studies” any more.

  40. How to Subvert Democracy: Montesinos in Peru
    John McMillan, Pablo Zoido
    Journal of Economic Perspectives Fall, 2004

    Which of the democratic checks and balances – opposition parties, the judiciary, a free press – is the most forceful? Peru has the full set of democratic institutions. In the 1990s, the secret-police chief Montesinos systematically undermined them all with bribes. We quantify the checks using the bribe prices. Montesinos paid television-channel owners about 100 times what he paid judges and politicians. One single television channel’s bribe was five times larger than the total of the opposition politicians’ bribes. By revealed preference, the strongest check on the government’s power was the news media.

  41. I am sure that the fake news did not change any intelligent persons mind. There was enough real news about hilliary and friend’s email, that has never been denied, to let everyone know that keeping these same group in power would be a mistake.

  42. We endured fake news for 8 years, mostly from the lying Obama. He had frequent off the record meetings with the networks and newspapers. The AP always cooked the unemployment numbers, And our economy as constantly in a Recovery. All the state run media gladly told the lies and fake news for their Kardashian, messiah president. The problem was, the jig was up : his lies caught up with him.

  43. Drain the swamp lol! More like dig it deeper to make more room . Jobs ? Like the ones in Atlantic City and elsewhere , where the working man gets scewed again by Hoover and his kind of “smart. business man” Let’s just do away with the whole EPA. And while we’re. at it the bunch at foggy bottom , the UN etc .Ironically the folks who can’t stop telling you who won are the same ones whose jobs are never coming back . The Circus isn’t folding , just moving ! Feel bad for my grandkids and their kids ! What will they be left with , a polluted planet or a nuked one but hey billionaires need more billions right ! Don’t forget to keep drinking the kool-aid !

  44. Hopefully Hilary will keep drinking the ” fake news ” cool aid. The progressive partisans keep believing and trusting the ” fake ” news. Good day and good night.

  45. Oh, did you mean all the news on NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, and even National Review and Fox? Is that’s the fake news you’re referring too? I didn’t think so.

  46. “Researchers: Fake News Did Not Alter Election Results”

    Oh, and by the way, this is a “Fake News” story.

  47. Fake news didn’t have any effect on me, but I can’t say the same for the kids burning college campuses to keep opposing views from being heard.

    I think without fake news and media bias Hillary not only would not have won a 1/2 dozen states. In fact, she wouldn’t have even gotten the nomination. She wouldn’t have been Secretary of State or a US Senator because Bill would not have survived impeachment for all the things he did.

    It’s good to know what you believe and to in turn act on your values. Fake new didn’t influence me, but be careful! Saying it had no effect is to dismiss the evil that permeates that industry as irrelevant or inconsequential. The outrage over Russias alleged interfence in our election by outing the truth about Hillary and the DNC is nothing to the full knowledge that our press corps seeks to dupe voters into their pet candidates every time we go to the polls.

  48. “Social media”?

    WHAT ABOUT THE LIBERAL “MAINSTREAM” MEDIA?!?!?

    ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo, LA Times, etc., etc., etc…

    Hillary spent 1.2 Billion dollars on her campaign. (Several times what Trump spent) and that put what, 50 thirty second ads in the average American home? The liberal media blasted hours of anti Trump pro Hillary hate propaganda into every American home every day for most of a year.

    “Fake news” gave Hillary a half dozen points in the polls and several states.

  49. Yes it did
    Every liberal I know was tricked by tons of fake news. They think the Russians hacked the election and Trump is a KKK member

  50. Fake news has been around forever, but it used to be called “propaganda”. Today, it’s just an excuse for angry sore-losers because they can’t accept that they had a bad candidate. Sure, lots of moronic false stories were presented in social media during the election (from both sides), but the only folks who believed the worst of the garbage were also folks who had their minds made up for one candidate or the other. It’s time to get past the election. Stupid, fake-news stories didn’t persuade anyone. It’s delusional to believe otherwise.

  51. I would suggest that the “not fake news” in general doomed Hillary’s run for the prez position. DNC cheating, Hillary’s health, low energy, poor rally turnouts, her past issues. Every time she’s in the honest news it’s about something deceitful or untrustworthy that she’s a part of. And then the Fake Mainstream Media tried to prop her by saying she was way ahead in the polls, and pampering her like a sickly golden child, while constantly condemning her opponents. The common American can recognize bullshit when they see it, and we saw it in many flavors everyday on 90% of the media until she lost, and now the Fake Mainstream Media gets to suck up all that stank for the next 8+ years. I would suggest that if a news organization favors an opponent in the future, that they should keep your/their slanted opinions to yourself and report the fucking news.

  52. Bullshit. 1200 people are supposed to represent the entire population of the United States? I saw the amount of crap people were sharing and believing. What a perfect way for the establishment to cover their tracks of rigging an entire election. The whole system is a sham. No one voted for these cretins, certainly not half the country in either case. By every measure (except the ones in Mainstream Media) Bernie Sanders should have been our new president.

  53. I am insulted as a Trump supporter, watching the politicians sell us out for decades for their own gain…INCLUDING HILLARY AND OBAMA, that the whole cesspool is shocked that TRUMP WON!~ Why so shocked? Out of touch for sure!

    He WON BIG, and WON legitimately, how insulting these morons are to say PUTIN put a gun to our heads to vote for him. The lies the media and the DIMMS are telling to try and de-legitimize this historic win is disgusting!

    Scary so many SNOWFLAKES and crazy middle aged white women see differently, and believe the drivel of their inarticulate and false narrative of Trump, a guy who was in office office less then 24 hrs. Their idiotic march was meant to empower (in their minds)and turned into something embarrassing for generations to come!

    I have watched Hillary for a long, long time! How these people wanting her in office is offensive to me, as a woman, I am sure it was all about her vagina and not her accomplishments. She stuck by her man and ridiculed woman of his sexual assaults, she did it to a young woman who was raped as well. Hillary Clinton is not a champion of anyone or anything..unless it escalates her agenda! The stories are out there. The book are out there, verified and true! Yet the liberal looks at that eye opening wealth of information as it was garlic and a cross! People have spoken, things verified..and the sheep still wanted her! What are her accomplishments? She was in all her official positions…BECAUSE OF BILL..HER HUSBAND! She is who these leftist loons CHAMPION as an “empowered”, did it myself woman?? I knew at all costs given Hillary’s history of deceit and nastiness, and her sellout of America…SHE WOULD NOT BE PRESIDENT! I did not believe the polls for a minute.

    Shame on the Democratic voter, who got screwed by the DNC manipulation and theft to get their weak candidate in the position to run for president! Nobody but Bernie in the Democratic Party? The collusion with the MSM and SUPER DELGATES to get her the nod..when crazy Bernie was kicking her ass! YOU ALL SAID NOTHING!!!!!! AND LET THE DNC GET AWAY WITH THEIR SICK DEFEATING AGENDA! Debbie Wasserman Shultz should be in jail, and she was on TV the other night saying all sorts of bad things about Trump, who has been in office for 13 days!

    THE LIBS ARE NUTS, THE MEDIA IS NUTS, GEORGE SOROS IS A PIG AND THEY MARCH TO HIS BANK ACCOUNT! HE DOES NOT CARE ABOUT AMERICA, PROFIT AND DOOM and anarchy ARE HIS ONLY CONCERN! And DONALD TRUMP IS THE BAD GUY? Americans DID NOT WANT HILLARY, she was rejected AGAIN, with good reason! God Bless Donald Trump. I and others did not need the news of any kind to tell me what I have know for years. The Clinton’s, their “foundations”, their scandals etc. are a cancer on this country! And shame on the immature, inflammatory, treasonous. dangerous actions going on with supported grownups in our government and across the land. YOU LOST! Pray for our PRESIDENT, we sink or rise as a nation together..grow up!

  54. Notice that every hourly newscast from CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, MSNBC, NPR will say something negative about Trump. It was that way since the campaigns began and continues today. This is what makes me despise the media and the Democratic party(probably for life). I used to be a JFK Democrat but I believe that today JFK would be a Republican.

  55. So the results showed that a pro-Trump fake news story was FOUR TIMES as likely to have been seen and remembered as a pro-Clinton fake news story. The study then further concluded (based on the results of a survey question) that such stories did not affect the election results. Drawing such a conclusion from such a question assumes that people make rational, conscious decisions and know exactly why they selected one candidate over another. Such an assumption is completely unwarranted and renders the conclusion drawn invalid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.