Extreme bias (when you should have known better), goes beyond bias and becomes lies, frauds or fakes. This is about those fakes, and the faking fakers that fake them.
There's a reason why the moderately informed don't trust the Fact Checkers: the answer is most fact checkers are as biased (or more so) than the rest of the publications they work for. Who moderates the moderators?
While the term goes back 100 years, Sharyl Attkisson sums it up in a video.
While our media has always had false narratives and bad stories that are Fake News (exampled include: Edward R. Murrow's "See it now" McCarthy'ing Joe McCarthy (1954), Richard Jewel story (1996), story about a plane crashing into Camp David after 9/11 (2001), Duke LeCross Rape Case (2014), Michael Brown and 'hands up, don't shoot' narrative (2014), and so on). We didn't use the term "Fake News", just liberal media bias or incompetence, but it's been around since the first liberal got sloppy or partisan at a newspaper.
Then on September 13, 2016 Hillary Clinton supporters Google and Eric Schmidt, used a shell charity (a non-profit called "First Draft,") to start seeding the term to attack right wing websites ("to tackle malicious hoaxes and fake news reports"). Hillary Clinton and her surrogate David Brock of Media Matters admitted in a campaign letter that they pressured Facebook to join the effort. Google warned Conservative websites to remove stories that Google didn't like, or they'd take away their ad revenue. And Barack Obama and the liberal media followed along, regurgitating what they were told: none were going to let this opportunity (to curate what information we could see) go to waste, all in the name of protecting free speech. All coincidentally done at the same time, in what could only be a coordinated campaign attack.Unfortunately for them, it backfired when people noticed that the mainstream liberal media made more errors and was less honest, and started throwing it back in their face. Fake News applied more to the News, Google, Facebook, Obama and other curators and finger pointers than their victims. Donald Trump used that to hijack the term and use it back against them. The left tried to change the narrative and pretend that Trump had created the term, and they wanted to stop using it and claimed it was a hateful term and an attack on free press to point out the Presses bias or errors. And that's where we are today.
While our media has always had false narratives and bad stories that are Fake News (exampled include: Edward R. Murrow's "See it now" McCarthy'ing Joe McCarthy (1954), Richard Jewel story (1996), story about a plane crashing into Camp David after 9/11 (2001), Duke LeCross Rape Case (2014), Michael Brown and 'hands up, don't shoot' narrative (2014), and so on). But Clinton supporters (Googe/Eric Schmidt) re-popularized the term to try to attack conservatives, and it backlashed against the mainstream liberal media big time: since they made more errors and were less honest.
The FakeHate grievance industry is so broad, that they are branching out, and have to have multiple divisions. Hey, you get what you incentivize. and the virtue signaling left rewards victimhood -- so people are lining up to join in. This is just the subset of FakeHate that is specifically about fake racial crimes.
There's a subcategory of Fake Hate, and Fake Crimes that's Fake Rape. The left likes to spread lies (myths) and then use as an excuse for more government or oppression of the white male patriarchy. Like their fantastical claims that we have a "rape culture", that sexual assault is everywhere (especially on campus) with exaggerated claims, and that Women never use their sexuality to get ahead, have regrets and/or lie about being sexually assaulted or raped. While facts show that fake sexual accusations happens between 2-10% of the time (from multiple studies), which is actually about 5x more common than other crimes that are faked. The reason is pretty obvious, it's an easy crime to claim, and a hard crime to disprove, and it garners more attention and sympathy. You get what you incentivize, and this has great pity rewards. This is magnified in high profile cases.
This is a list of things that people believe, based on "Studies" that have been debunked or discredited: Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez • Stanford Prison Experiment • Numbers Covered by Obamacare • Minimum Wage Laws • Medicare-for-all popularity • Climate Consensus • Beepocalypse • 2014.06.06 DGU Disinformation • and so on.
Of course there is inequality and injustice in the world, and even in our nation. But by and large, we're in the top handful of countries in the world as far as tolerance and diversity, in every dimension. But the progressive left is addicted "progress" (change), not balance, or knowing when to stop/slow/moderate. So no matter what progress is made, they have to ignore it, exaggerate the wrongs and the potential for government to fix society with a few laws and a little more intolerance towards that with which they disagree -- until they get to the point where their views are a caricature of reality, and a delusion. That only they are virtuous, and those who disagree in any degree, are not (and thus are enemies). Here's a list of silly or abusive things the Social Justice Warriors (Snowflakes) demand.