Please don't misuse the term "fake news." Fake news has a specific meaning: false stories that have no basis in fact but have tantalizing headlines meant to attract attention.

Attempting to change the meaning of the term dilutes its importance and introduces unnecessary confusion.

If "Fake News" ever meant that for the majority of english speakers, it is gone. It seems to have skyrocketed in the modern lexicon as a way to attack media to shift the conversation. Whenever I hear someone use the term Fake News, I am immediately more critical of their words.

agreed. using this phrase is the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and running away

Actually this is exactly what fake news is, putting facts in different spotlight, and let people to reach wrong verdict: (also it is called propaganda)

Even when reading the article, author is going between two sides, but considering headline and sub-headline, it is obvious it is at least clickbait and biased.

- "Zoom iOS App Sends Data to Facebook Even if You Don’t Have a Facebook Account" + "This sort of data transfer is not uncommon, especially for Facebook; plenty of apps use Facebook's software development kits (SDK) as a means to implement features into their apps more easily, which also has the effect of sending information to Facebook." + "I think users can ultimately decide how they feel about Zoom and other apps sending beacons to Facebook, even if there is no direct evidence of sensitive data being shared in current versions,"

- "Zoom's privacy policy isn't explicit about the data transfer to Facebook at all." - "That's shocking. There is nothing in the privacy policy that addresses that," + Zoom's privacy policy says "our third-party service providers, and advertising partners (e.g., Google Ads and Google Analytics) automatically collect some information about you when you use our Products," but does not link this sort of activity to Facebook specifically.

No it is not, and you're doing exactly the thing that is the problem (calling Fake News something other than its original definition). Examples of Fake News include:

* "69% of veterans disapprove of [Political Candidate]" (not actual poll results)

* Claiming a rally for a political candidate is being organized that does not exist

Another indicia of fake news is that it looks like it's coming from a legitimate news outlet - the graphics are there and it's attributed to a legitimate-sounding outlet (like "America News Network") but is not one.

It's fine if you want to call propaganda propaganda, but don't call it fake news. They are not identical.

Fake news frequently has a basis in facts that are twisted around to make the reader believe something else.

Your definition of fake news is wrong.

It is not wrong. There are other well-recognized and understood descriptive terms for things like what you are referring to: "questionable journalism," "propaganda," "hit piece," etc.

Having a common vocabulary helps establish an agreed-upon framework by which we can analyze these articles.