5 ms·

In my observation these fact checking organisations usually fall down on the left's side of things, so either it's predominantly the right that lies, or the fac

In my observation these fact checking organisations usually fall down on the left's side of things, so either it's predominantly the right that lies, or the fact checkers conveniently ignore controversies that are open and shut bad behaviour on the left, or my perception is incorrect. Though I have to say the whole concept of a single self-appointed authoritative source troubles me, what with its Ministry of Truth overtones.

ajross 8y ago
> the fact checkers conveniently ignore controversies that are open and shut bad behaviour on the left Could be true, I guess. Everyone has "perspective" about what is important. That still doesn't seem to be a reason to disbelieve a fact checker when they tell you that, say, POTUS is lying, though. > Though I have to say the whole concept of a single self-appointed authoritative source troubles me, what with its Ministry of Truth overtones. There are literally multiple competing fact checking organizations. How exactly does that have overtones of centrally enforced authority? How in particular given that the actual central authority in this country has made a habit about calling correct but unflattering coverage "lies"?
- wu-ikkyu 8y ago
  >Could be true, I guess. Everyone has "perspective" about what is important. That still doesn't seem to be a reason to disbelieve a fact checker It gives reason to doubt based on a known political bias. >How exactly does that have overtones of centrally enforced authority? Because it implies one is unable to determine truths and falsehoods for themselves
- growlist 8y ago
  The problem I see is that unless these organisations are beyond criticism they can always be accused of bias and all their work dismissed, and then consider the context: 'It is impossible to overstate the degree of daily vituperation visited upon the president in the media. Comics and actors use their non-political programs to attack him, often to the implicit applause of the press. Virtually all coverage outside the conservative Fox News and isolated conservative outlets is negative, often couched in highly hostile terms. Virtually all of the columnists at the New York Times and the Washington Post, America’s two most respected dailies, despise Trump – and that includes nearly all of the conservative, libertarian and Republican columnists too. Trump supporters who follow news at all cannot escape the daily blast of negativity. This has, predictably, hardened the attitudes of many Trump supporters.' https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/23/liberals-donald-trump-support https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/23/libera...
  - ajross 8y ago
    You're conflating fact checkers with "the media", and sort of changing the subject. Can you explain again why exactly you don't trust answers you get from Snopes or Politifact? Don't tell me what "many Trump supporters" think. Tell me why you don't trust them.
    - growlist 8y ago
      That's a fairly aggressive tone of yours. I'm not going to respond.
      - collyw 8y ago
        That sounds like a cop out to me.
        growlist 8y ago
        Did I mention something that popped up on the wrongthink matrix?
    - knightofmars 8y ago
      growlist, as someone who just stumbled upon this thread. There was nothing aggressive about the "tone" of this comment.
      - growlist 8y ago
        In the first place the post puts words in my mouth, and second it then directs me to answer questions in a not particularly civil manner. And you are borderline gaslighting me by questioning my response!
    - growlist 8y ago
      Can you tell me why I should trust them? Shouldn't we approach these organisations that purport to be the single source of truth with extreme scepticism? Apart from that in my observation these organisations are not impartial, and I think in the context of the universal anti-Trump media they are easily dismissed as just another group suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome. I should make clear I don't live in the US and so have no direct stake in this and follow it more out of curiosity/amusement than anything else. I'm not going to try to argue Trump doesn't lie, but I think CNN etc are becoming hysterical.
enraged_camel 8y ago
>>In my observation these fact checking organisations usually fall down on the left's side of things, so either it's predominantly the right that lies, or the fact checkers conveniently ignore controversies that are open and shut bad behaviour on the left, or my perception is incorrect. As the saying goes, truth has a liberal bias. :)
- beaconstudios 8y ago
  it's funny that you mention liberalism because the common understanding of the meaning of "liberalism" has shifted over time. Classical liberalism is much closer to libertarianism than progressivism.
forapurpose 8y ago
> the whole concept of a single self-appointed authoritative source troubles me I think it would trouble anyone. However, there are many, many media sources and several major fact-checkers, including six used in the article: We started by identifying thousands of true and false stories, using information from six independent fact-checking organizations
jibal 8y ago
> either it's predominantly the right that lies Yes.
- IshKebab 8y ago
  Yeah this is pretty clear to anyone who pays any attention. The Brexit bus is an obvious recent example.
  - growlist 8y ago
    Because Remain were whiter than white eh? 'Publishing Treasury analysis, [George Osborne] said a Leave vote would cause an "immediate and profound" economic shock, with growth between 3% and 6% lower.' Versus: 'That Immediate Brexit Recession - UK GDP Growth 0.6%, Best In Developed World' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36355564 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-3635556... https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/01/26/that-immediate-brexit-recession-uk-gdp-growth-0-6-best-in-developed-world/#60de2e013775 https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/01/26/that-imm...
    - IshKebab 8y ago
      > predicts Gross Domestic Product would grow by 3.6% less than currently predicted. In such a scenario, it suggests sterling would fall by 12%, unemployment would rise by 520,000, average wages would fall by 2.8% and house prices would be hit by 10%. Sterling fell by pretty much exactly 12% (that's got to be luck though - no way their models are that good). All the others were wrong though, you're correct.
- growlist 8y ago
  Do you honestly believe this? To what would you attribute the difference - for example do you think that the right are morally corrupted, and the left righteous?
  - jibal 8y ago
    Of course the right are morally corrupted ... that's the essence of being a right winger.

ajross 8y ago

> the fact checkers conveniently ignore controversies that are open and shut bad behaviour on the left Could be true, I guess. Everyone has "perspective" about what is important. That still doesn't seem to be a reason to disbelieve a fact checker when they tell you that, say, POTUS is lying, though. > Though I have to say the whole concept of a single self-appointed authoritative source troubles me, what with its Ministry of Truth overtones. There are literally multiple competing fact checking organizations. How exactly does that have overtones of centrally enforced authority? How in particular given that the actual central authority in this country has made a habit about calling correct but unflattering coverage "lies"?

wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>Could be true, I guess. Everyone has "perspective" about what is important. That still doesn't seem to be a reason to disbelieve a fact checker It gives reason to doubt based on a known political bias. >How exactly does that have overtones of centrally enforced authority? Because it implies one is unable to determine truths and falsehoods for themselves
growlist 8y ago
The problem I see is that unless these organisations are beyond criticism they can always be accused of bias and all their work dismissed, and then consider the context: 'It is impossible to overstate the degree of daily vituperation visited upon the president in the media. Comics and actors use their non-political programs to attack him, often to the implicit applause of the press. Virtually all coverage outside the conservative Fox News and isolated conservative outlets is negative, often couched in highly hostile terms. Virtually all of the columnists at the New York Times and the Washington Post, America’s two most respected dailies, despise Trump – and that includes nearly all of the conservative, libertarian and Republican columnists too. Trump supporters who follow news at all cannot escape the daily blast of negativity. This has, predictably, hardened the attitudes of many Trump supporters.' https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/23/liberals-donald-trump-support https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/23/libera...
- ajross 8y ago
  You're conflating fact checkers with "the media", and sort of changing the subject. Can you explain again why exactly you don't trust answers you get from Snopes or Politifact? Don't tell me what "many Trump supporters" think. Tell me why you don't trust them.
  - growlist 8y ago
    That's a fairly aggressive tone of yours. I'm not going to respond.
    - collyw 8y ago
      That sounds like a cop out to me.
      - growlist 8y ago
        Did I mention something that popped up on the wrongthink matrix?
  - knightofmars 8y ago
    growlist, as someone who just stumbled upon this thread. There was nothing aggressive about the "tone" of this comment.
    - growlist 8y ago
      In the first place the post puts words in my mouth, and second it then directs me to answer questions in a not particularly civil manner. And you are borderline gaslighting me by questioning my response!
  - growlist 8y ago
    Can you tell me why I should trust them? Shouldn't we approach these organisations that purport to be the single source of truth with extreme scepticism? Apart from that in my observation these organisations are not impartial, and I think in the context of the universal anti-Trump media they are easily dismissed as just another group suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome. I should make clear I don't live in the US and so have no direct stake in this and follow it more out of curiosity/amusement than anything else. I'm not going to try to argue Trump doesn't lie, but I think CNN etc are becoming hysterical.

enraged_camel 8y ago

>>In my observation these fact checking organisations usually fall down on the left's side of things, so either it's predominantly the right that lies, or the fact checkers conveniently ignore controversies that are open and shut bad behaviour on the left, or my perception is incorrect. As the saying goes, truth has a liberal bias. :)

beaconstudios 8y ago
it's funny that you mention liberalism because the common understanding of the meaning of "liberalism" has shifted over time. Classical liberalism is much closer to libertarianism than progressivism.

forapurpose 8y ago

> the whole concept of a single self-appointed authoritative source troubles me I think it would trouble anyone. However, there are many, many media sources and several major fact-checkers, including six used in the article: We started by identifying thousands of true and false stories, using information from six independent fact-checking organizations

jibal 8y ago

> either it's predominantly the right that lies Yes.

IshKebab 8y ago
Yeah this is pretty clear to anyone who pays any attention. The Brexit bus is an obvious recent example.
- growlist 8y ago
  Because Remain were whiter than white eh? 'Publishing Treasury analysis, [George Osborne] said a Leave vote would cause an "immediate and profound" economic shock, with growth between 3% and 6% lower.' Versus: 'That Immediate Brexit Recession - UK GDP Growth 0.6%, Best In Developed World' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36355564 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-3635556... https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/01/26/that-immediate-brexit-recession-uk-gdp-growth-0-6-best-in-developed-world/#60de2e013775 https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/01/26/that-imm...
  - IshKebab 8y ago
    > predicts Gross Domestic Product would grow by 3.6% less than currently predicted. In such a scenario, it suggests sterling would fall by 12%, unemployment would rise by 520,000, average wages would fall by 2.8% and house prices would be hit by 10%. Sterling fell by pretty much exactly 12% (that's got to be luck though - no way their models are that good). All the others were wrong though, you're correct.
growlist 8y ago
Do you honestly believe this? To what would you attribute the difference - for example do you think that the right are morally corrupted, and the left righteous?
- jibal 8y ago
  Of course the right are morally corrupted ... that's the essence of being a right winger.