4 ms·

People always focus on the agenda of the 'fact-checker' in these arguments, but never seem to focus on the agenda of the 'fact-checked'. This isn't to say that

People always focus on the agenda of the 'fact-checker' in these arguments, but never seem to focus on the agenda of the 'fact-checked'. This isn't to say that said fact checkers are always correct because people can always double back and issue a counter argument, but rather that it's easy for people to just post nonsense and run, leaving it to fester if uncontested. For example, there's been multiple incidents of that here on HN where people post something that's incorrect by all definitions. It statistically does not align with reality. The best way to counter the deluge of low effort, low accuracy claims is with a medium-effort, medium-accuracy source. Usually in these cases the poster simply vanishes because they did not intend to actually follow up a factual counterclaim.

dsfyu404ed 4y ago
>The best way to counter the deluge of low effort, low accuracy claims is with a medium-effort, medium-accuracy source. That's not an effective counter at least as far as my observation goes. These jerks win not by backing up their asinine claims with sources. They win by diverting everyone else's energy away from debating their asinine claims to making the debate one of sources. Heck, a good chunk of the time they do it you don't even need to find other sources because they're just using junk journalism where the title says A but the article says B. If being "proven wrong" was actually detrimental to their causes they would modify their behavior. I'm sure one of our resident link-spewers will be along shortly to disagree with me and then edit his comment five times adding subsequent links to garbage that nominally back up his assertion...
dylan604 4y ago
> The best way to counter the deluge of low effort, low accuracy claims is with a medium-effort, medium-accuracy source. except we now live in a world with phrases like alternative facts. if someone doesn't want to believe in something because it does not align with their ideals, then you will not be able to convince them regardless of how incontrovertible your facts may be. sure, the more "solid" the fact, the more bizarre the counter is, but there will always be a counter.
- ricardobeat 4y ago
  Such an odd thing to experience. I didn't think this would be possible ten, twenty years ago, but portions of the population have developed an ability to completely dismiss factual information, even when they can easily verify it by themselves in a couple minutes. And it's not even the 'how many died in WW2' kind of data, but simple public records like 'tax revenue for 2020', 'road accidents in october'. It's as if being able to find information so easily, has made it less trustworthy. Being flooded with fake and twisted news certainly feels like one of the causes.
  - dylan604 4y ago
    less trustworthy than who though? there are certain people that whole heartily believe that what the person on their TV is telling them is without a doubt true. anyone trying to convince them otherwise is just part of the opposing forces. even when shown where, for example the fox news hosts, have admitted in sworn testimony the did not believe the big lie and knew it to be false, it is rebutted as fake. Fake News and Alternative Facts have to be the worst combinations I've ever known. they may even be some of the most dangerous as well. it's classic cult control. when i was a kid being forced to weekly attendance at my mom's church, it was often heard that you can't go listening to other preachers, reading other books of thought, or similar as that's the enemy's weapon to confuse you and tempt you away. as i got older and actually started paying attention, these things really started sounding like nails on a chalkboard. it wasn't just the one church either. so by only listening to the one source and ignoring all others, they are actually doing good by what they have been told. those of us reading multiple sources are just twisting in the wind so to speak with no real convictions (or some such as i've been told).
  - maybejustmaybet 4y ago
    Reflective Equilibrium might have something to do with. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflective_equilibrium https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflective_equilibrium One could alter the perception of the "facts" in order to feel comfortable about them.
- fzeroracer 4y ago
luckylion 4y ago
Fact-checkers take on a quasi-official role though, a kind of information police that has special trust bestowed on them. We typically hold the police to a higher standard than we do those they interact with. Why wouldn't we also do this with professional and/or official fact-checkers?
dmonitor 4y ago
the fact-checker could also be the person who is just flat out wrong, though. Just ban/block the OP (for spreading misinformation, obviously) so they can’t respond and put a big flag next to their post labeling it misinformation.

dsfyu404ed 4y ago

>The best way to counter the deluge of low effort, low accuracy claims is with a medium-effort, medium-accuracy source. That's not an effective counter at least as far as my observation goes. These jerks win not by backing up their asinine claims with sources. They win by diverting everyone else's energy away from debating their asinine claims to making the debate one of sources. Heck, a good chunk of the time they do it you don't even need to find other sources because they're just using junk journalism where the title says A but the article says B. If being "proven wrong" was actually detrimental to their causes they would modify their behavior. I'm sure one of our resident link-spewers will be along shortly to disagree with me and then edit his comment five times adding subsequent links to garbage that nominally back up his assertion...

dylan604 4y ago

> The best way to counter the deluge of low effort, low accuracy claims is with a medium-effort, medium-accuracy source. except we now live in a world with phrases like alternative facts. if someone doesn't want to believe in something because it does not align with their ideals, then you will not be able to convince them regardless of how incontrovertible your facts may be. sure, the more "solid" the fact, the more bizarre the counter is, but there will always be a counter.

ricardobeat 4y ago
Such an odd thing to experience. I didn't think this would be possible ten, twenty years ago, but portions of the population have developed an ability to completely dismiss factual information, even when they can easily verify it by themselves in a couple minutes. And it's not even the 'how many died in WW2' kind of data, but simple public records like 'tax revenue for 2020', 'road accidents in october'. It's as if being able to find information so easily, has made it less trustworthy. Being flooded with fake and twisted news certainly feels like one of the causes.
- dylan604 4y ago
  less trustworthy than who though? there are certain people that whole heartily believe that what the person on their TV is telling them is without a doubt true. anyone trying to convince them otherwise is just part of the opposing forces. even when shown where, for example the fox news hosts, have admitted in sworn testimony the did not believe the big lie and knew it to be false, it is rebutted as fake. Fake News and Alternative Facts have to be the worst combinations I've ever known. they may even be some of the most dangerous as well. it's classic cult control. when i was a kid being forced to weekly attendance at my mom's church, it was often heard that you can't go listening to other preachers, reading other books of thought, or similar as that's the enemy's weapon to confuse you and tempt you away. as i got older and actually started paying attention, these things really started sounding like nails on a chalkboard. it wasn't just the one church either. so by only listening to the one source and ignoring all others, they are actually doing good by what they have been told. those of us reading multiple sources are just twisting in the wind so to speak with no real convictions (or some such as i've been told).
- maybejustmaybet 4y ago
  Reflective Equilibrium might have something to do with. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflective_equilibrium https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflective_equilibrium One could alter the perception of the "facts" in order to feel comfortable about them.
fzeroracer 4y ago

luckylion 4y ago

Fact-checkers take on a quasi-official role though, a kind of information police that has special trust bestowed on them. We typically hold the police to a higher standard than we do those they interact with. Why wouldn't we also do this with professional and/or official fact-checkers?

dmonitor 4y ago

the fact-checker could also be the person who is just flat out wrong, though. Just ban/block the OP (for spreading misinformation, obviously) so they can’t respond and put a big flag next to their post labeling it misinformation.