GOP Proposal to Punish Fact Checkers.

[ajax18]

It looks like Facebook's fact checkers got the part about Covid being produced in a Wuhan lab wrong. The New York Post reported this a year ago but were censored for reporting it on Facebook and Twitter. Now even Fauci admits it contrary to the WHO. Are they going to censor Fauci for contradicting the omniscient WHO? Nope, the globalist oligarchs make too much money from China to not support China in its coverup. Fact checkers aren't just a wIng of the communist Democrat party but also are beholden to the communist Chinese party.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

A lot of news organizations reported on the Chinese corona virus cover up over the last year:

https://www.google.com/search?q=china+w ... UTF-8#ip=1

What Facebook was primarily removing were weird conspiracy theories about covid and 5G or covid antivax stuff or covid being developed as a bioweapon* by Qanon nutjobs.

So. It stands to reason that Xanax, of course, is outraged that his stupidity isn’t allowed to flourish on their platform.

* what most likely happened is that their version of the cdc was damned around with some viruses, some scientists or lab workers got sick, they went out to the public, and it spread from there. crap happens.

- Doc

[Moksha]

Ajax, where is the Klan in all of this? Are they still bogged down in trying to hammer out that Flat Earth stuff?

[ajax18]

What Facebook was primarily removing were weird conspiracy theories about covid and 5G or covid antivax stuff or covid being developed as a bioweapon* Qanon nutjobs.

Really? Because what this lady said turns out to be true.

https://www.newsweek.com/Twitter-suspen ... 19-1532193

Don't pretend that free speech exists in America. We have no more freedom of information than the people's republic of China.

[Dr Exiled]

I think the answer to the fact checker issue is to not rely on them and not allow a small group of billionaire companies like Facebook, Twitter, and google to control speech. The answer to bad speech is more speech, not less, not deplatforming. The republican that suggested the silly legislation should be recalled or voted out next go around.

[Chap]

I think the answer to the fact checker issue is to not rely on them and not allow a small group of billionaire companies like Facebook, Twitter, and google to control speech.

Pardon me, but aren't you confusing two separate issues?

(a) Whether it is permissible for a journalist, or anybody who wishes to, to conduct an evaluation of the truthfulness or otherwise of a statement published by somebody, such as a politician or another journalist, and to publish that evaluation.

(b) Whether major online platforms run by private companies such as Twitter may tag material posted by their users to indicate whether it is false or otherwise misleading.

I find fact checkers of the first kind very useful, and do not understand why you are urging us 'not to rely on them'.

[Dr Exiled]

I think the answer to the fact checker issue is to not rely on them and not allow a small group of billionaire companies like Facebook, Twitter, and google to control speech.

Pardon me, but aren't you confusing two separate issues?

(a) Whether it is permissible for a journalist, or anybody who wishes to, to conduct an evaluation of the truthfulness or otherwise of a statement published by somebody, such as a politician or another journalist, and to publish that evaluation.

(b) Whether major online platforms run by private companies such as Twitter may tag material posted by their users to indicate whether it is false or otherwise misleading.

I find fact checkers of the first kind very useful, and do not understand why you are urging us 'not to rely on them'.

It is better not to rely on anyone as everyone seems to have an agenda, fact checkers and tech monopolies included. It all has to do with free speech and the recent drive to severely limit it in the name of driving everyone to a certain point of view. Let the people debate whatever. Don't limit what is posted on this or than site merely because some tech billionaire doesn't like it. How about showing us why a particular conspiracy theory is false? It should be easy enough.

This site is a prime example of how things should be out in the greater internet universe. If you don't like what someone says here, tell them and explain why they are wrong. Shades doesn't ban anyone from the discussion. Everyone is free to make a jackass out of themselves or write great, cogent points that inform. Also, even a jackass can make a good point once in a while, so let them speak.

[Chap]

How about showing us why a particular conspiracy theory is false? It should be easy enough.

That's exactly what journalist fact checkers set out to do. They do a great deal of research that most of us simply don't have the time or the resources to do ourselves. And they cite their sources, so that you can check them in turn. Their task is far, far more than simply stamping a statement TRUE or FALSE, with the intention that their readers should accept that uncritically.

The idea that such people do not fill a useful - indeed essential - role strikes me as very strange.

[Brack]

It looks like Facebook's fact checkers got the part about Covid being produced in a Wuhan lab wrong. The New York Post reported this a year ago but were censored for reporting it on Facebook and Twitter. Now even Fauci admits it contrary to the WHO. Are they going to censor Fauci for contradicting the omniscient WHO? Nope, the globalist oligarchs make too much money from China to not support China in its coverup. Fact checkers aren't just a wIng of the communist Democrat party but also are beholden to the communist Chinese party.

I don't know really where COVID originated from. But I do know that fact checkers being just a wing of the "communist" Democrat party is false. Back in 2013, PolitiFact gave Obama the "lie of the year." Since Biden has been President, there have been six "mostly false" rulings and three "mostly false" rulings from PolitiFact. Link
And Factcheck.org did a great job of fact checking Biden's address to Congress.

In his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Joe Biden got some facts wrong and stretched others, mainly repeated claims we’ve heard before:

Biden said he inherited the “worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.” But when he took office, the economy had recovered some from its low point earlier in the pandemic.
He repeated the debunked claim that he had “traveled over 17,000 miles” with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Biden referred to the American Jobs Plan creating “millions of jobs” and generating “trillions of dollars in economic growth.” The jobs estimate is accurate, but economic growth projections are mixed.
The president said he is “restoring the program” to address the causes of migration from Northern Triangle countries that “the last administration decided … was not worth it.” Although funding for the initiative declined and was delayed during the Trump administration, it wasn’t completely eliminated, as Biden’s remark may have suggested.
Biden said the “vast majority” of the “over 11 million undocumented folks” in the U.S. overstayed a visa. But immigration experts estimate that most people living in the U.S. illegally crossed the southern border without authorization.
The president claimed the 1994 assault weapons ban, which expired 10 years later, “worked,” but the academic evidence isn’t clear.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/factc ... -congress/

[Dr Exiled]

How about showing us why a particular conspiracy theory is false? It should be easy enough.

That's exactly what journalist fact checkers set out to do. They do a great deal of research that most of us simply don't have the time or the resources to do ourselves. And they cite their sources, so that you can check them in turn. Their task is far, far more than simply stamping a statement TRUE or FALSE, with the intention that their readers should accept that uncritically.

The idea that such people do not fill a useful - indeed essential - role strikes me as very strange.

Essential that some group does our thinking for us? No thanks. That is why I left Mormonism.