Fact checking is a blunt instrument against the lack of subtlety and polarization going in internet discussions In fact, about the article concerned, even if c

Fact checking is a blunt instrument against the lack of subtlety and polarization going in internet discussions In fact, about the article concerned, even if correct in essence (and I don't see a reason why not) it is probably not conductive to good discussion. Because it wants to set a tone at the headline level (amongst other things). > For these and other reasons, Zweig argues that the study ought to be ignored entirely: Masking in schools may or may not be a good idea, but this study doesn't help answer the question Exactly! (from the article in question). But it's beside the point. If the study is good or not is a perfect valid discussion, if the CDC has made a good decision it is a perfect discussion, except discussing this in a magazine article is BS. Because it is assigning blame and picking a side. Wearing a mask in a pandemic is a tiny issue, but it's being blown out of proportion. That study is one of the inputs the CDC takes to take a decision (again, in a pandemic, under pressure and under changing scenarios). And if the CDC is wrong then revert it. Again, nobody is dying for wearing a mask. So, if fact-checking it was petty, the article itself was petty as well. Nothing of value was lost.