I find it interesting how Fake News has two definitions depending on which of the two culture bubbles it comes from. On one side it refers to all out fabrication by a source that exists purely to spam social media feeds. The other side refers to more of a lugenpresse - legitimate news organizations that technically use facts, but cherry pick them in a way that presents a pre-determined narrative. Ironically, to this side, the NYT is one of the top poster children of their definition of Fake News.
Yeah, popularizing the term "fake news" was a an impressively epic own-goal by traditional media.
And while I do agree that MSM fakeness mostly comes in the form of "technically facts, mischaracterized and cherry-picked," there is also a lot of just straight untruths as well, but laundered through anonymous sources. The effect is the same, in that you come away believing untrue things.
Another form of fakeness is "honest" mistakes (that always seem to coincidentally play into some popular narrative) that are hyped in headlines, but then only quietly corrected later, e.g., stuff like this:
Even after corrections the fake stories from mainstream media still "stick" if they have the proper political value. There are people in this thread still insisting that the Covington High School kids surrounded and intimidated a native elder even though that story was retracted and the media that pushed it is now being sued for libel.
