The article is devoted to the definition of the linguistic status of the “fake” phenomenon, the study of the sources of its destructiveness as one of the types of linguistic manipulation. The work examines speech models of argumentation, persuasion, communicative pressure and fake in order to establish a number of their differential and integral features, to distinguish fake from related linguistic phenomena. The material for the study is represented by the web pages of print and online media of various levels and formats, blogs operating within the framework of public discourse. The basis for the analysis is an approach taken to distinguish between linguistic and rhetorical norms, according to which the argumentation should be considered as a correct non-rhetorical type of persuasion. In turn, as rhetorical types of persuasion, one should consider conviction, which is realized as a correct rhetorical influence, communicative pressure and fake, which are incorrect (destructive) rhetorical types of linguistic manipulation. Analysis of the components of the speech model of these linguistic phenomena and the establishment of the sources of their destructiveness makes it possible to more clearly determine fake as a separate type of linguistic manipulation. It is concluded that fake differs from argumentation by the presence of pathos in the structure of the speech model of persuasion; from argumentation and persuasion - by the implicit nature of the intention and destructive communicative orientation. Fake should also be distinguished from communicative pressure, based on the following principles: fake is unreliable false information, as well as an implicit form of intention; communicative pressure is an excess of the permissible norms of morality and ethics of a measure of influence, as well as an explicit form of intention.