Watch out for this fake news website masquerading as The New York Times

[markpkessinger]

I saw two articles in the past 24 hours posted on Facebook, from the domain "nytimes.com.co", by people who thought they were posting real news stories from the New York Times. I was suspicious, because both stories were ones might expect to find in a gossip column -- not the Times' usual fare. And sure enough, my suspicions were correct. This really cannot be called harmless parody, because the site is deliberately trying to deceive people into believing it is the New York Times. Beware!

[font size=5]Watch out for this fake news website masquerading as The New York Times[/font]

By CALE GUTHRIE WEISSMAN
Jun. 29, 2015, 10:34 AM

Earlier today I noticed someone tweet a bizarre article. The headline read “Marcus Bachmann Cries ‘Call Me Caitlyn’ After SCOTUS Ruling,” and the story made sweeping allusions about the identity of Michele Bachman’s husband.

Even more bizarre, upon first glance it seemed to come from The New York Times — or at least that’s what the URL indicated.

But, it actually didn’t. This story came from another website: NYTimes.com.co., masquerading as The New York Times. Notice the extra ‘.co’ at the end of the URL there? It’s there specifically to trip you up.

The archives of this website — which admittedly does look like an elementary student coded it — show dozens of fake news articles. All of them are topical, not too outlandish to be completely discounted, and propagate intentionally misleading information.

< . . . . >

[villager]

1. The NY Times is increasingly a fake news site in its own right

But thanks for the heads-up

[MADem]

2. I have no sympathy for the NYT. They hired Judith Miller, they hired Jayson Blair.

They don't hold their reporters to a high standard; their editorial controls are nonexistent. It's like a blog, with a crossword puzzle and slightly more reliable spell-check.

We all had fun with the McCain story back when he was running for the Presidency, where McCain was "said to" be having "some sort" of a "relationship" with an attractive lobbyist who looked a bit like his wife, but NYT offered NO evidence save whispers, rumors and innuendo, no proof, just the carping and whinging by "anonymous" sources who may have had axes to grind--compared to the sourcing on that story, a blind item in the National Enquirer had more legs to stand on.

This is how they "non-apologized" for that hot mess, despite the disgust of their readers (and they really NON-apologized...RMoney must have paid them a fortune or promised them the moon):

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/business/media/21askthenewsroom.html?pagewanted=all

If you weren't looking, ya woulda missed it!

[markpkessinger]

3. I didn't post this out of sympathy for the New York Times . . .

. . . I posted it because generating fake news stories, while purporting to be a particular entity, and with no disclaimer, is wrong and fraudulent, regardless of the media outlet in question. And although the site seems to appeal to left-leaning sensibilities, when we and our fellow Democrats distribute stuff from a fake site, it makes us look every bit as bad as the worst of the right wing media outlets. A site like this won't ultimately damage the New York Times, but it very well may damage the credibility of those who unwittingly distribute items from it under the guise of real news.

[MADem]

4. I understand that. I made my comment because I take everything that says "New York Times"

on it with a grain of salt, anyway....because they've lost any reputation they may once have had for being an honest broker of the news. I have no sympathy for them at all.

It's like reading the Daily Mail--lots of pictures, they're sometimes first on the scene...but they are to the right of Attila the Hun!

Caveat emptor, with them and everyone, really.