Hacker News Reader

There's some proof, in the amount of shares (non-ironic ones) that these websites would get on Facebook.

The abuse of the term is infuriating because the "fake news" websites are so clear cut, there shouldn't even be a debate. Some websites just make up facts to write a story, as their main source of stories. And there's no way CNN, Breitbart, MSNBC, any of them fit the claim.

View on HN

In hindsight, the term Fake News wasn't a good one. "Organized [foreign] disinformation" is both more descriptive and would have been less easily appropriated and diluted.

I hear you, but I think some of that is some sort of blind support, rather than an informed opinion that many of the viewers would necessarily repeat. Just a matter of wanting to cheer your team on with no regard for fact or not.

There's also a factor of people from the other side going there. Or people just curious.

Overall, I don't think that it's a good idea to use mere traffic as a way to determine influence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com