Fake News != Biased News != Unprovable Conjecture.
It's impossible to automatically determine truth when something is published. "The Pope endorses Trump for president" was the archetype of the fake story, but it is impossible to distinguish between that and being the first publication to break the story. While I've seen the stats on these circulating on FB, I'm unconvinced that most of these fall into this category. To me, this must be 100% false with no possibility of interpretation for news to be "fake".
Biased News (whether you think CNN/NYTimes/Breitbart is the worst of this doesn't matter) is protected. Take the NYTimes reporting of WMDs in Iraq: It was dumb how easily they accepted the US Government line. I disagreed at the time, and still do, but it's hard to see that as deliberately publishing things they knew to be fake.
Unprovable Conjecture stories ("pizzagate"/"Trump is a Russian plant" depending on your leanings) is something that I think is really damaging to sensible discourse and an informed electorate. "Fake News" is a distraction from this, which is something I think is the real problem.