My take on "fake" news
It seems like the elites and the narrative-control mainstream media want us to talk about "fake news". Alright, bring it on!
First of all, keep in mind that all entities (official news media corporations, included) act according to economic incentives. Therefore, pushing the "fake news" meme, with the tacit implication that the BS peddled at CBS, ABC, MSNBC, NBC and even Fox, is non-fake news, is in the economic best-interest for these corporations (MSM, for short).
Secondly, news is never reported as a pure collection of facts, since, even if that were one's motive, it is quite hard to pull off technically. News is selected, edited and presented, couched in the underlying meta-narrative and value substructure of the reporter, editor, communicator, anchor, etc. This meta-narrative communicates a whole host of values, that include a whole host of axiomatic pre-commitments (i.e. beliefs).
Values and beliefs are cherished, regardless of where one falls on the political spectrum -- this is common and essential to our humanity. Based on one's cherished values, one engages in selection and confirmation bias in the production and consumption of news. None of this is inherently bad.
Folks with different values can indeed engage in civic discourse, by simply acknowledging that, in the absence of perfect prescience and omniscience, we all interact with the world using an epistemological matrix that contains both unprovable faith commitments (i.e. values) and facts (interpreted consistently with our values).
Or, more simply, we all see the world differently -- and that is not inherently bad. The fact that we conclude differently even when presented with the same set of incomplete facts is quite natural -- and does not arise from malice or stupidity.
Not acknowledging this is a sign of philosophical immaturity and, when coupled with self-serving sanctimonious paternalism, is quite insufferable.
Mainstream media (MSM) reports "news" using an elitist worldview filter (progressive populist economics + authoritarian domestic policy + neoconservative foreign policy), since they act on the behest of the ruling elites.
To make news value-free is quite difficult and one rarely sees it. This is not an indictment of news media, per se -- it is an observation of human nature. However, when all the major "official" news outlets become non-value-free in one direction, supporting the same agenda, folks stop caring and, eventually, start actively resisting.
A psychologically pleasing way to resist is to concoct plausible tribal stories (conspiracies, speculations, etc.) that communicate the values of the resisting tribe (e.g. conservatives). This unsubstantiated conjecturing requires imagination, creativity and skill, esp. since it has to connect the dots with actual known facts and keep the story logically consistent and plausible. This great human tradition of story-telling is the history of oppressed human tribes from the Hebrews of the Exodus and the Exile all the way down to the Gospel and blues-music story-telling of the slaves in the American South.
A personal story
I used to listen to NPR via KQED, its San Francisco affiliate, on the commute and it got me into a hair-tearing rage every time. It sanctimoniously calls itself "national" and "public" -- however, all its content is presented with the implicit assumption that the Keynesian, big-government worldview is the only correct one and the small-government, pro-liberty approach was dismissed as fringe and radical (i.e. it was engaged in constant ad hominem). I, for one, would want nothing to do with NPR or PBS anymore (let alone CBS, ABC, MSNBC, NBC, etc.) and, if I had a say, I would not want my tax dollars funding such Statist propaganda either.