3 ms·

> fact checking is potentially damaging to society Why do you think this? I am struggling to understand.

by bdhska 5y ago

andybak 5y ago
The argument would be along the lines of "It will stifle debate and silence voices on topics outside the orthodox view. A simple glance through the history of science shows many ideas now regarded as fact were initially heretical and outside the mainstream. Open discussion of controversial ideas is healthy." which is obviously reasonable. However it needs to be balanced against the other problem we face - widespread dissemination of inflammatory misinformation, in many cases by nation states deliberately sowing dissent.
dundarious 5y ago
Fact checking as it is currently practiced is counter-productive: unknowable things are called "facts", and "pinocchios" are given even if you're factually correct just because (being charitable myself here) the checker things you're not being charitable enough to their political faction.
- unclebucknasty 5y ago
  I keep seeing allusions to this bias. Can you point to any mainstream fact checking organizations that are consistently biased and any specific fact checks that illustrate this?
  - dundarious 5y ago
    Please don't dismiss it just because of the source or its focus on Sanders. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/02/washington-post-sanders-bezos-fact-checking https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/02/washington-post-sanders-b...
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      I take your point and, while there's some subjectivity there, that may well be an example of fact-checking done in bad faith. I'm just not sure that it is happening at scale though. But I do agree that, to the extent that it is happening, it is particularly egregious when done under the guise of fact-checking versus, say, your standard tilted article.
      - dundarious 5y ago
        Economics and foreign policy are two areas where the fact checkers are most often cloaking ideology as facts. These are two massive and hugely important political areas though, so I think it's pretty widespread. Comments about political leaders, especially if the leader is aligned with the fact checking group, are also suspect. But leaders are huge often huge bullshit artists, so the fact checkers are also often absolutely right.

> fact checking is potentially damaging to society Why do you think this? I am struggling to understand.

by bdhska 5y ago

> fact checking is potentially damaging to society Why do you think this? I am struggling to understand.

The argument would be along the lines of "It will stifle debate and silence voices on topics outside the orthodox view. A simple glance through the history of science shows many ideas now regarded as fact were initially heretical and outside the mainstream. Open discussion of controversial ideas is healthy." which is obviously reasonable. However it needs to be balanced against the other problem we face - widespread dissemination of inflammatory misinformation, in many cases by nation states deliberately sowing dissent.

dundarious 5y ago

Fact checking as it is currently practiced is counter-productive: unknowable things are called "facts", and "pinocchios" are given even if you're factually correct just because (being charitable myself here) the checker things you're not being charitable enough to their political faction.

unclebucknasty 5y ago
I keep seeing allusions to this bias. Can you point to any mainstream fact checking organizations that are consistently biased and any specific fact checks that illustrate this?
- dundarious 5y ago
  Please don't dismiss it just because of the source or its focus on Sanders. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/02/washington-post-sanders-bezos-fact-checking https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/02/washington-post-sanders-b...
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    I take your point and, while there's some subjectivity there, that may well be an example of fact-checking done in bad faith. I'm just not sure that it is happening at scale though. But I do agree that, to the extent that it is happening, it is particularly egregious when done under the guise of fact-checking versus, say, your standard tilted article.
    - dundarious 5y ago
      Economics and foreign policy are two areas where the fact checkers are most often cloaking ideology as facts. These are two massive and hugely important political areas though, so I think it's pretty widespread. Comments about political leaders, especially if the leader is aligned with the fact checking group, are also suspect. But leaders are huge often huge bullshit artists, so the fact checkers are also often absolutely right.