3 ms·
If the basic work of fact-checking itself justifies removing right wing content the problem isn't the fact checkers.
by kingkawn 6y ago
If the basic work of fact-checking itself justifies removing right wing content the problem isn't the fact checkers.
- vorpalhex 6y agoWhat about the fact checkers who rated the EFF as wrong on the warrantless surveillance issues?
- _underfl0w_ 6y agoI don't care enough to have a horse in this particular comment race, but your comment is an obvious example of whataboutism. Not a solid foundation for any argument, regardless of the content. Something to consider. Plus the op specifically mentioned falability in fact checkers.
- vorpalhex 6y ago> Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. I'm directly providing a counter example. Most people here are very well equipped to understand the nuance of the warrantless surveillance issue and why the fact checker was quite wrong - part of why it's a meaningful case. Funny enough, your first statement is an example of the bandwagon fallacy. "Well I'm just a neutral party but..."
- jerkstate 6y agoWell, since none of the overridden fact checks were described in the article (which seems like a failure of journalism to me) we can’t really know. Anyways Facebook is a private company, they can do whatever they want, right?