zlacker

He's wrong about those outlets being reliable, but those outlets weren't considered reliable before his presidency either. The term "fake news" wasn't even in the lexicon before 2015-16, and it certainly wasn't something that most people considered would be coming from outlets like NYT or the Washington Post. That's absolutely something that he was right about. It may be a case of a broken clock being right twice a day, but that doesn't mean he wasn't right.

>>bart_s+(OP)
> The term "fake news" wasn't even in the lexicon before 2015-16

Not the exact term itself, but the significancy of it. The "lying press" is a pejorative used since at least the XIX century [1].

Are we looking for 100% reliability here? Then, yes, we could call the NYT or the WP "fake news". But that is just hyperbole, directed at creating doubt and uncertainty where it does not exist. Once Trump followers had a excuse to label the NYT as "partisan" or "fake", it was easy for Trump to steer the narrative any way he wanted.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lying_press