Well made documentary. The look in some of the victims eyes shows how incredible and frustrating it must be to be a target of the fake news culture. The saddest thing is knowing our current president has utilized this counter culture for political gain.
After Truth: Disinformation and the Cost of Fake News
2020
Action / Documentary
After Truth: Disinformation and the Cost of Fake News
2020
Action / Documentary
Plot summary
An investigation into the ongoing threat caused by the phenomenon of “fake news” in the U.S., focusing on the real-life consequences that disinformation, conspiracy theories and false news stories have on the average citizen.
Uploaded by: FREEMAN
November 20, 2020 at 06:24 PM
Director
Tech specs
720p.WEB 1080p.WEBMovie Reviews
The sad truth.
Very Disturbing
It's very disappointing and disturbing that people make up stories they know to be false and publish them without any thought to the consequences.
This is way too long and biased to be great
Interesting enough, but it's largely a campaign for the Democratic party.
It has some interesting segments about Pizzagate, the fake Robert Mueller stories, InforWars, Alex Jones, Trump supporters. During Trump it was hugely popular for progressives to make these docs about how deceiving the right-wingers in USA were by using extreme cases from the right-wing. I guess it's fun enough to watch this stuff, but if you know these cases already you won't find much new here. I did appreciate how they found recordings from behind the scenes of some of this stuff like the Comet Pizza attack. But it has the runtime of a movie and yet the info here really should have been delivered in an hour. That's the main issue. It tries to be progressive so the only fake news examples they use are from about 2020 and all by extreme right-wingers. Nothing else. And that's not nearly enough to fill out a runtime or frankly even present a proper view of fake news. So the doc tries to show how CNN and NYT are factual news while stuff on the right-wing is fake news. But then it doesn't quite present this theory directly. We kinda have to figure out what it is about ourselves. Because the story structure is this loose I often forgot what it was trying to tell with a certain storyline or what points it had made prior to this. It's just a bunch of interviews with progressives attacking Republicans and then a bunch of shots of extremist on the right doing stupid stuff. I guess the interview attacks make sense when you splice the doc like this.
For example, the docs supports banning and cancelling right-wing fanatics and even blocking certain topics from social media. But as the cases it brings up are all extreme any viewer would just nod along and agree on this. So banning Alex Jones makes some sense. But that's a strawman. A proper example would for example be a person or organization PayPal typically bans. They never tell you why they ban you and they have been known for just banning very conservative people with no extremist connections or point of views. So here I feel like the debate could have been more fruitful and fair as the other side would have a proper say. Instead we get a bunch of interviews with people whining about Alex Jones and how he is not banned and how evil social media is and then in the very same doc he gets banned. So what's the point? Clearly the system works in your favor. You see someone you want cancelled and he is cancelled. I guess it could have been done faster in their eyes.
If the doc had been half right-wing and half left-wing fake news it would have filled out the runtime and presented a full picture. Instead it contains a few cool shots, but overall feels extremely preachy and way too left-wing to really make a good and fair case. Hell, some interviews are filmed in the CNN offices. It's not bad or boring. It's just more of the same and many cases presented here are not presented fully whatsoever anyhow.