John Stossel Sues Facebook for Allegedly Defaming Him With Fact-Check
The veteran journalist is upset with what was affixed to his post about California forest fires and their cause.
www.hollywoodreporter.com
It 's good to see him push back.
It raises the question in my mind of who are the fact checkers? Are they experts in the field they're fact checking, or are they Silicon Valley tech nerds that wear politically shaded lenses in their glasses?
It raises the question in my mind of who are the fact checkers? Are they experts in the field they're fact checking, or are they Silicon Valley tech nerds that wear politically shaded lenses in their glasses?
It 's good to see him push back.
It raises the question in my mind of who are the fact checkers? Are they experts in the field they're fact checking, or are they Silicon Valley tech nerds that wear politically shaded lenses in their glasses?
is 2 out of 3 bad? i'd drink regular latte but that's a really, REALLY, bad ideaPrius drivin’, hoodie wearin’, soy latte drinkers. 🤓
is 2 out of 3 bad? i'd drink regular latte but that's a really, REALLY, bad idea
Yeah, don't be sad.According to Meatloaf, it's quite the opposite 😉
is 2 out of 3 bad? i'd drink regular latte but that's a really, REALLY, bad idea
ah, good old mr loaf. he's got a lyric for just about every situation, doesn't he?According to Meatloaf, it's quite the opposite 😉
he can be cooked right too, you know.hey I liked meatloaf especially if it was cooked right....wait you mean the entertainer? Well, I liked him to aint he dead now?
ewww I'm not that type of guy you know cannibelhe can be cooked right too, you know.
"Fact checkers" are nothing more than people who work for a site and are paid to thumbs up or thumbs down postings/article/videos on any give subject. They may or may not be "experts in the field".
How any given site presents their fact checking varies, too. Some cite the claim, then go about citing the applicable references, including the source for which the claim is about. This can essentially be a small article on the subject.
Some flag the claim and insert a link.
Some just flag the claim with nothing much else about it.
I agree...it's good to see some push back.
In fact, I'd love to seem some push back from John Q. Public on the general veracity of media publications in the first place. All this focus on "fact checking" is a sideline to the fact that major media outlets SUCK at presenting factual information, and in context. They get away with this by hanging this upon the First Amendment. The first amendment does not give permission to present misleading or outright lies in their publications.
I don't think much will come of this. In the end the censorship isn't an idea dreamed up by the social media giants, they're just following the orders of their government masters, and since the government masters are the ones who ultimately decide wrongdoing who do you think they're going to side with?