@unpublished{mukerji_conceptual_nodate,
	title = {A {Conceptual} {Analysis} of {Fake} {News}},
	url = {https://philarchive.org/archive/MUKACA},
	abstract = {In this paper, I offer a conceptual analysis of fake news. In essence, I suggest analysing this notion as a species of Frankfurtian bullshit. This construal, I argue, allows us to distinguish it from similar phenomena like bad or biased journalism and satire. First, I introduce four test cases. The first three are, intuitively, not cases of fake news, while the fourth one is. A correct conceptual analysis should, hence, exclude the first three while including the fourth. Next, I go through some factors that could explain the difference between the first three cases and the fourth one before I offer my explanation. After that, I propose an analysis of fake news and show that it matches our intuitions about the four test cases. Finally, I consider a possible objection to my proposal.},
	urldate = {2018-03-16},
	author = {Mukerji, Nikil S.}
}

{"_id":"ShN9oRr9ioxDyBEaZ","bibbaseid":"mukerji-aconceptualanalysisoffakenews","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Mukerji, N. S."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"unpublished","type":"unpublished","title":"A Conceptual Analysis of Fake News","url":"https://philarchive.org/archive/MUKACA","abstract":"In this paper, I offer a conceptual analysis of fake news. In essence, I suggest analysing this notion as a species of Frankfurtian bullshit. This construal, I argue, allows us to distinguish it from similar phenomena like bad or biased journalism and satire. First, I introduce four test cases. The first three are, intuitively, not cases of fake news, while the fourth one is. A correct conceptual analysis should, hence, exclude the first three while including the fourth. Next, I go through some factors that could explain the difference between the first three cases and the fourth one before I offer my explanation. After that, I propose an analysis of fake news and show that it matches our intuitions about the four test cases. Finally, I consider a possible objection to my proposal.","urldate":"2018-03-16","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Mukerji"],"firstnames":["Nikil","S."],"suffixes":[]}],"bibtex":"@unpublished{mukerji_conceptual_nodate,\n\ttitle = {A {Conceptual} {Analysis} of {Fake} {News}},\n\turl = {https://philarchive.org/archive/MUKACA},\n\tabstract = {In this paper, I offer a conceptual analysis of fake news. In essence, I suggest analysing this notion as a species of Frankfurtian bullshit. This construal, I argue, allows us to distinguish it from similar phenomena like bad or biased journalism and satire. First, I introduce four test cases. The first three are, intuitively, not cases of fake news, while the fourth one is. A correct conceptual analysis should, hence, exclude the first three while including the fourth. Next, I go through some factors that could explain the difference between the first three cases and the fourth one before I offer my explanation. After that, I propose an analysis of fake news and show that it matches our intuitions about the four test cases. Finally, I consider a possible objection to my proposal.},\n\turldate = {2018-03-16},\n\tauthor = {Mukerji, Nikil S.}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Mukerji, N. S."],"key":"mukerji_conceptual_nodate","id":"mukerji_conceptual_nodate","bibbaseid":"mukerji-aconceptualanalysisoffakenews","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://philarchive.org/archive/MUKACA"},"downloads":0},"bibtype":"unpublished","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero-group/science_et_ignorance/2114998","creationDate":"2020-04-24T08:42:39.703Z","downloads":0,"keywords":[],"search_terms":["conceptual","analysis","fake","news","mukerji"],"title":"A Conceptual Analysis of Fake News","year":null,"dataSources":["RztxrSRh6LxCd8bYe"]}