@article{habgood-coote_stop_nodate,
	title = {Stop {Talking} {About} {Fake} {News}!},
	abstract = {Since 2016, there has been an explosion of academic work and journalism that fixes its subject matter using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. In this paper, I argue that this terminology is not up to scratch, and that academics and journalists ought to completely stop using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. I set out three arguments for abandonment. First, that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ do not have stable public meanings, entailing that they are either nonsense, context-sensitive, or contested. Secondly, that these terms are unnecessary, because we already have a rich vocabulary for thinking about epistemic dysfunction. Thirdly, I observe that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ have propagandistic uses, meaning that using them legitimates anti-democratic propaganda, and runs the risk of smuggling bad ideology into conversations.},
	journal = {Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy},
	author = {Habgood-Coote, Joshua}
}

{"_id":"nv4CDnkq36dcYfqc9","bibbaseid":"habgoodcoote-stoptalkingaboutfakenews","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2018-08-23T09:26:55.659Z","title":"Stop Talking About Fake News!","author_short":["Habgood-Coote, J."],"year":null,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero-group/science_et_ignorance/2114998","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Stop Talking About Fake News!","abstract":"Since 2016, there has been an explosion of academic work and journalism that fixes its subject matter using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. In this paper, I argue that this terminology is not up to scratch, and that academics and journalists ought to completely stop using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. I set out three arguments for abandonment. First, that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ do not have stable public meanings, entailing that they are either nonsense, context-sensitive, or contested. Secondly, that these terms are unnecessary, because we already have a rich vocabulary for thinking about epistemic dysfunction. Thirdly, I observe that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ have propagandistic uses, meaning that using them legitimates anti-democratic propaganda, and runs the risk of smuggling bad ideology into conversations.","journal":"Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Habgood-Coote"],"firstnames":["Joshua"],"suffixes":[]}],"bibtex":"@article{habgood-coote_stop_nodate,\n\ttitle = {Stop {Talking} {About} {Fake} {News}!},\n\tabstract = {Since 2016, there has been an explosion of academic work and journalism that fixes its subject matter using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. In this paper, I argue that this terminology is not up to scratch, and that academics and journalists ought to completely stop using the terms ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’. I set out three arguments for abandonment. First, that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ do not have stable public meanings, entailing that they are either nonsense, context-sensitive, or contested. Secondly, that these terms are unnecessary, because we already have a rich vocabulary for thinking about epistemic dysfunction. Thirdly, I observe that ‘fake news’ and ‘post-truth’ have propagandistic uses, meaning that using them legitimates anti-democratic propaganda, and runs the risk of smuggling bad ideology into conversations.},\n\tjournal = {Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy},\n\tauthor = {Habgood-Coote, Joshua}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Habgood-Coote, J."],"key":"habgood-coote_stop_nodate","id":"habgood-coote_stop_nodate","bibbaseid":"habgoodcoote-stoptalkingaboutfakenews","role":"author","urls":{},"downloads":0},"search_terms":["stop","talking","fake","news","habgood-coote"],"keywords":[],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["RztxrSRh6LxCd8bYe"]}