The paper investigates the evolving understanding of "post-truth" and "fake news," tracing its trajectory from its initial articulation within left and liberal intellectual circles as a critique of mainstream media's entanglement with power structures to its current usage. The author argues that the term "post-truth" has been co-opted and weaponized, particularly in the context of the 2016 US presidential election and the subsequent rise of the "fake news" discourse. This co-option is partly facilitated by the mainstream media's self-representation as a defender of democratic values, despite existing critiques of its biases and structural limitations. The study explores this complex interplay between the concept's origins, its transformation, and its current utilization in various contexts, including academic discourse, mainstream media, and the political landscape.

The paper draws extensively upon existing literature on post-truth and fake news, spanning political science, discourse studies, and philosophy. Key works cited include those by Davies (2016, 2019), Tillmanis (2018), Kakutani (2018), Barnes Rodriguez et al. (2017), Parks and Schou (2018), Argyris et al. (2017), Vosoughi et al. (2018), Groeber (2018), McIntyre (2015, 2018, 2019b), Hughes (2016), and Chadwick (2017). The author also engages with seminal works on media criticism such as Herman and Chomsky's *Manufacturing Consent* (2002 [1988]) and Crouch's *Post-Democracy* (2004), and Keyes' *The Post-Truth Era* (2004), demonstrating the intellectual lineage of the current discourse on post-truth and fake news.

The paper employs a Foucauldian approach to discourse analysis, specifically focusing on the "archaeology of knowledge." This involves tracing the historical evolution of the concepts of "post-truth" and "fake news," identifying shifts in meaning and usage across various contexts. The author also incorporates Agamben's framework of "apparatus/dispositive" to analyze the composite nature of the concepts and their diverse applications. The analysis draws on a wide range of sources, encompassing journalistic articles, academic publications, and political commentary, aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of the discourse surrounding post-truth and fake news from various ideological perspectives. The author examines the self-representation of mainstream media outlets, analyzing their rhetoric and framing of "post-truth" and "fake news" to illustrate how these concepts have been strategically utilized.

The study reveals a significant discursive shift in the usage of "post-truth." Initially a critique from the left and liberal perspectives of mainstream media's complicity with power, the term has been appropriated by mainstream media and right-wing actors to discredit their opponents. This appropriation is analyzed through several key themes. First, the paper traces the historical development of the term, highlighting its origins in critiques of government and media manipulation. Second, it explores how the mainstream media's self-conception as a defender of democratic values enables its strategic deployment of "post-truth" rhetoric. Third, the study examines the role of social networks in the spread of "fake news" and the implications for democratic discourse. Finally, the study analyzes the use of "post-truth" accusations against leftist and postmodern intellectuals, demonstrating the ideological dimensions of the discourse. The analysis shows how data harvesting and psychological manipulation through targeted advertising contribute to the problem, referencing the Cambridge Analytica scandal as a prime example. The study also highlights the inconsistencies and paradoxes in mainstream media's discourse on post-truth and fake news, revealing its strategic utilization in power dynamics. The paper concludes that the current discourse is largely driven by emotion-based appeals rather than objective facts, resulting in a distortion of truth and the undermining of critical inquiry.

The findings challenge the simplistic narrative surrounding "post-truth" and "fake news." The paper demonstrates that the current discourse is not simply about the spread of misinformation, but is deeply intertwined with power struggles and ideological battles. The strategic appropriation of these concepts by powerful actors has contributed to the delegitimization of dissenting voices and the erosion of trust in institutions. This study underscores the need for a more nuanced understanding of the complexities of the current information environment and the limitations of simplistic solutions to the problem of misinformation. The methodology employed, drawing from both Foucault and Agamben, provides a framework for analyzing similar discursive phenomena in other contexts.

This paper highlights the complex evolution and strategic manipulation of the concepts "post-truth" and "fake news." It underscores how these terms have been weaponized in ideological conflicts, obscuring underlying power dynamics and hindering critical discourse. Further research could explore cross-cultural applications of these concepts and delve deeper into the psychological mechanisms influencing the acceptance of misinformation. A crucial future direction is to analyze how to foster a more robust and resilient public discourse capable of resisting manipulation and promoting informed decision-making.

The study primarily focuses on the Anglo-American context, limiting the generalizability of findings to other cultural settings. Future research should expand the scope to encompass diverse cultural and political systems. Additionally, while the paper examines a wide range of sources, a more quantitative analysis of media coverage could provide further insights into the patterns and trends in the usage of "post-truth" and "fake news."