Gannett prints fake newspapers at Des Moines Register plant | Hacker News Reader

Gannett prints fake newspapers at Des Moines Register plant

bleedingheartland.com

38 pointshhs21 comments

Commercial printing company prints what its customers request without passing judgement on the contents is what I'd hope for from a commercial printing company.

Is the content illegal? I don't think so, or the article would mention that. Is the content distasteful? Probably, but a commercial printing company doesn't endorse the content it prints.

https://www.gannett.com

> We are Gannett

> We seek to build trusted local communities where people thrive.

That is not some printing company. It is a newspaper empire that claims to be trustworthy but produces this kind of vile, untrustworthy content.

They should be denounced for this. They should cease and print an apology at the very least.

Or decides not to if its owners find the content too objectionable.

That should also be allowed.

Naming and shaming Gannett is also allowed. Not all moral wrongs are illegal. They're taking incredibly dirty money. It's shameful.

Probably? Personally, I don't really find the answers to "is it illegal" and "should the business care" to be very interesting. Those answers don't affect whether or not this is a terrible and dangerous thing to do.

I remember when deceit was considered wrong -- without qualification.

Now nothing is "wrong" unless it is illegal AND you get caught.

Thank you for saying that telling the truth is a good thing, and not telling the truth is bad.

When was that, exactly?

I have the same perception of a change - not something as simple as it going from "not OK" to "OK", but definitely a change. It's not that surprising if we also accept that division and bitterness have significantly increased over the past decade or two, since resorting to political deception more often and more dramatically would also reasonably increase in such an environment.

Well, as one example, our current POTUS is Joe Biden. His run for that same office back in the 80s was stopped because at the time his serial plagairism was considered shameful. That was wrong, but not illegal.

We have much looser standards today. We don't seem to care about right and wrong so much as any means to defeat the (slightly) greater evil of a (narrowly) more repugnant candidate.

So that was sometime between the 80s and today?

This is called yellow journalism and it has existed for a long time. While I disagree with it(I get these stupid things and have to throw them away) it's the side effect of a free press. People who are too confident their side will remain in power indefinitely insist on putting new limits on freedom of press.

This does make me wonder what constitutes a fake newspaper. These are deceitful because we expect paper of that size and quality, and with that design, to come from a paper that has been around for decades. So certainly they are fake established newspapers, or fake reputable newspapers.

Wrong. Anybody can start a newspaper and print it on that kind of paper if they want. In fact you’d use that kind of paper if starting a newspaper because it works well. A new newspaper isn’t a fake newspaper.

And in fact that’s all this is. A new newspaper. A mixture of editorial and political advocacy and local news.

I don’t believe we disagree on that point; these are technically newspapers. I could have written it better, but I was trying to say that they are exploiting the widespread impression that something that looks like a newspaper is established and trustworthy.

If cheap digital production, unused newsprint capacity and better data continue to make it financially viable to invent and distribute new newspapers every couple of years, then the reputation to exploit (the deceit) will fade away. Or perhaps the low media trust found in recent surveying will continue, to the same effect.

I think you’re right. Something about this is certainly dishonest.

I am struggling to figure out what exactly.

Fake newspaper websites are also a scourge, typically pushing some particular product.

But interestingly, in this case I struggle to see what exactly the difference is. Perhaps it’s because I have such a low view of newspapers in the first place…

> And in fact that’s all this is. A new newspaper. A mixture of editorial and political advocacy and local news.

A strange new newspaper, then. Can you name any other real newspaper that only writes stories when a political campaign requests them?

There is a pretty specific publication requirement... but I like the confidence.

“combine political advocacy with stories resembling neutral coverage”

Thank Goodness the Times and the Post don’t engage in anything like that.

That’s cool by me. Democracy’s had an OK run but state socialism merged with fascism is the future.

Advertisements. The plant is printing political advertisements in a newspaper-like format.

How interesting that an article about misleading usage of printing presses has a misleading headline.

The image preceding the article depicts an item of printed material that, as shown in the bottom right corner, refers to itself as a "newspaper".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com