Fact Check this

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
Post Reply
subgenius
Stake President
Posts: 580
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:31 pm
Location: your mother's purse

Re: Fact Check this

Post by subgenius »

Gadianton wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 7:39 pm
subgenius wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 4:44 pm
Everyone is undoubtedly familiar with the modern day prevalence of "fact checkers" in and around social media. While we would be hard pressed to find such a thing in the media of days gone by, there is a certain "acceptance" of these things today.
But why?
What qualifies anyone or anything to be a "fact checker" online?
nothing, that's what.
I propose that online "fact checking" is nothing more than censorship and a deliberate control of information.
Do not misunderstand my point, i favor a private entity's right to censor/control/curate information on its own turf(eg, this board)

But is "fact checking" not a satirical concept/branding for a site like Facebook? which is a platform, not a publisher.

And to what end do you qualify something as being "fact checked" online? Does it simply have to cite a source which you find more agreeable than others?(eg msnbc vs Fox)

So, to expand the question - what value and liability is there with the presence of "fact checkers" online? Is there a time/place for them? or will their presence eventually oversaturate the market and render them meaningless?
Hold on here, subs, first of all, for how long has Facebook been a "fact checker"? The "modern day prevalence" of fact checking is like, the last six months? Less?
OP mentions "social media" platform specifically and i think its reasonable to consider that factcheck.org (2003) which is a subsidiary of Zuckerberg qualifies as "modern time". Also, its a bit obvious that Facebook was an example, social media has been "fact checked" for +10 years, as you admitted.
I think a better example is Snopes, which has been around a while. You're trying -- and to a lesser extent Dr. E is also trying -- to have a meta discussion about fact checking. How can we know anything at all? If we can't solve the problem of knowledge; how do we really know what we think we know is true?, then how can we ever silence an opposing voice as literally any idea at any time could be wrong?
Its not such a broad philosophical question. In fact, its way simple. How do you, yes you, ascertain confidence in something you see has been fact checked.
Why should we trust Chemistry textbooks? It's possible that Chemistry is just a hoax. How can we really be sure? Should we allow every alternative explanation equal playing time in the classroom? Flat earth etc.?
Its social media, not academia.
settle down.
The meta discussion is more complicated than a debate over knowledge. I'll start a new thread on that.
This isn't a meta debate on knowledge, its more of an exploration on the influence and/or meaning of fact checkers on social media platforms...see also OP.
Using Snopes as an example of a real-world problem subs asks about, I have yet to have my right-wing friend contest any of the stupid right-wing nonsense emails he sends me when I cite Snopes as the authority. Why is that? Because there is no competition. The subs / Ajax world of stupid ideas literally has no competing source to Snopes. What they have is meme power, and the ability to get millions of people reciting the same things as if its common knowledge, without any sources. I'll say it again: There is no right-wing competitor to Snopes. So the discussion is over.
You werent discussing anything, you were simply dismissing the topic as being to complicated for you and then set forth attacking the messenger.
This much is known and this much is a fact.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8516
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: Fact Check this

Post by canpakes »

subgenius wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 8:53 pm
.
This isn't a meta debate on knowledge, its more of an exploration on the influence and/or meaning of fact checkers on social media platforms...see also OP.
From your OP, you favor this. As you wrote:
i favor a private entity's right to censor/control/curate information on its own turf
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 10636
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Fact Check this

Post by Res Ipsa »

Dr. Exiled, unless you are willing to embrace Postmodernism and declare that there is no truth —only stories, I don’t think what you say makes sense.

If fact checkers are genuinely committed to researching and reporting the facts, why would we expect an infinite series of fact checkers arriving at opposite conclusions?

And why would you try to spin the issue as me “picking fact checkers that I “like.” I “like” fact checkers who reliably research and present the relevant facts. If you don’t believe that “facts” exist, then, sure, saying Jews gassed Germans in the Holocaust is just as true as saying Germans based Jews. But if you believe that facts exist and that facts matter, it’s become pretty clear that giving everyone a microphone and letting them say whatever pops into their heads results in the facts ending up buried under tons of BS.

As I’ve previously argued, we already criminally punish people for false speech. Suggesting that any change of the boundary between protected false speech and unprotected false speech will be disastrous is an overreaction.

Friday, the President of the USA and his advisors had a serious discussion about declaring martial law as means of overturning an election. How did we get here? Because Trump, Powell, Guliani, Lin Wood, etc. know they can lie without consequence. Perversely, they may even be rewarded for lying. That’s where “the remedy for bad speech “ has led us to.

Look, I see millions of knee jerk reactions from folks on the left that demand extreme measures in response to the lying. I’m not on board with that. And, as I’ve told you, the position you take is what I’ve advocated all my life. But I’m also pragmatic enough to recognize when something I believe isn’t working. And when that happens, it’s better to seriously think about how to solve the problem than cling to an ideological position that places us in actual danger.
he/him
we all just have to live through it,
holding each other’s hands.


— Alison Luterman
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 5469
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Fact Check this

Post by Gadianton »

How do you, yes you, ascertain confidence in something you see has been fact checked.
And I showed you how, subs. Your own sources, such as NewsMax, when rubber hits the road, rely on legitimate sources like Reuters.

Take Snopes as an example, subs.

Find a Snopes article on any topic you desire, and show me what they missed in their fact checking, such that you are not confident in their conclusions. Show me the refutation from a "right-wing" fact checker that would turn the tables on a Snopes article.

My point is, you're trying to make this a philosophical argument about "confidence" in the abstract regarding facts ("who shaves the barber?" "who fact checks the fact checker?"). There are thousands of logicians beginning with David Hume who have failed to answer these kinds of questions in the abstract.

I'm telling you, the answer to your question lies in actually looking at real-world examples of fact-checking. I gave you a clear example, and you ignored it.

If you don't like my example, why not provide your own?
Last edited by Gadianton on Sun Dec 20, 2020 11:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have. They get rid of some of the people who have been there for 25 years and they work great and then you throw them out and they're replaced by criminals.
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 9716
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Fact Check this

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Tiffany Dover, the nurse who fainted on live tv after receiving the Covid vaccination is dead. She died from complications related to the booster in the vaccine. RIP.

- Doc
Chap
God
Posts: 2679
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:42 am
Location: On the imaginary axis

Re: Fact Check this

Post by Chap »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 10:19 pm
Tiffany Dover, the nurse who fainted on live tv after receiving the Covid vaccination is dead. She died from complications related to the booster in the vaccine. RIP.

- Doc
At first I thought 'Why is he posting that in this thread?'

But now I see what you did there ...
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 9716
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Fact Check this

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Image

Wow. Cool!

- Doc
subgenius
Stake President
Posts: 580
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:31 pm
Location: your mother's purse

Re: Fact Check this

Post by subgenius »

canpakes wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 9:08 pm
subgenius wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 8:53 pm
.
This isn't a meta debate on knowledge, its more of an exploration on the influence and/or meaning of fact checkers on social media platforms...see also OP.
From your OP, you favor this. As you wrote:
i favor a private entity's right to censor/control/curate information on its own turf
and?
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 9716
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Fact Check this

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Oh my GOD. Donald J. Trump just died.

Image

What. The. “F”?????

- Doc
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8516
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: Fact Check this

Post by canpakes »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:45 am
Oh my GOD. Donald J. Trump just died.

Image

What. The. “F”?????

- Doc
It’s true. I saw a picture on the web of this just a few seconds ago.

I signed an affidavit about it.
Post Reply