4 ms·
I agree that there might be evidence, and Factcheck.org may have gotten that wrong. But perfection isn't the bar we're aiming for, nor is it practically attain
by otterley 7y ago
I agree that there might be evidence, and Factcheck.org may have gotten that wrong. But perfection isn't the bar we're aiming for, nor is it practically attainable - "usually correct" is reasonable.
Moreover, let's not confuse testimonial evidence with fact. They are not identical. In our judicial system, the jury is the finder of fact; they weigh the evidence to make conclusions.
We also can't let a minor technical error in a tangential report invalidate the rest of what otherwise is a lie -- specifically the primary bold claim in the example advertisement that's at the heart of the article.
- barry-cotter 7y agoCorrect except when it matters is worse than known sea of lies and misinformation.
- WarOnPrivacy 7y agoThese are good points. Moreover, they're unusually well made.
- buboard 7y ago"usually correct" is what the general media is, and they all usually have an agenda. Whenever they get it wrong, the process of commenting itself is a fact-checking exercise that s usually better than the "fact checkers" (case in point this thread). That nullifies the idea of factcheckers imho I think the biggest issue with social media is: do not make truth a popularity contest