6 ms·

So these "factcheckers" are literally the media aka the propaganda machine. I wonder if that's the future we want, a future only politically correct opinions ar

So these "factcheckers" are literally the media aka the propaganda machine. I wonder if that's the future we want, a future only politically correct opinions are accepted, otherwise you're called a liar and you lose social points. It doesn't sound like democracy, but who knows.

maest 5y ago
You may be conflating "false information" with "politically incorrect statements".
- boppo1 5y ago
  Google "BMI letter to Mark Zuckerberg"
- megumax 5y ago
  I'm not an American, but these "fact checks" are not really based on actual facts, but mostly on "correct" opinions. For example, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/06/january-6-attack-capitol-guide-what-we-now-know/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/06/january-6... or https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/04/bidens-claim-that-nobel-winners-say-his-plan-would-reduce-inflation/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/04/bidens-cl...
  - marginalia_nu 5y ago
    The whole notion of facts is problematic. Facts are, from a epistemological point of view, things as they are. We do not have access to facts about the physical world, science does not produce such facts. Empirical science is a process that asymptotically approximates facts by eliminating false propositions.
    - YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y ago
      If I take 200mg of cyanid I am dead that's a fact.
      - marginalia_nu 5y ago
        That is a true statement, but it is not a fact in the epistemological sense. When we say a statement is true, what we mean is that the statement agrees with the facts. Or flipped around: The facts are the things that true statements correspond to, the things in themselves.
        YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y ago
        I think we have different oppinions of what the word fact means but the general consens is something like this. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact
        marginalia_nu 5y ago
        Here is a more nuanced take: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/facts/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/facts/ There is serious problems with facts merely being true statements if you start poking at the edge cases a bit. Consider that there are things that are, and statements that are true. If the two are the same, then all statements that are true must also be things that are. But it is true that if I were to lick my own forehead, it would become wet; yet I cannot lick my own forehead. This is an example of something that is true, yet cannot be. The statements that are true is a larger category than the things that are.
        YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y ago
        I totally understand your standpoint and I will dive deeper with your provided link but as I said before for the general public a true statement is indeed a fact. And just for shits and giggles https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/03/man-claims-to-be-only-person-in-the-world-who-can-lick-their-forehead-8202929/ https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/03/man-claims-to-be-only-person-... haha
        marginalia_nu 5y ago
        Isn't that the entire point of this "fact" checking, to raise the truth above the myriad of things the general public merely believes to be true?
- macrowhat 5y ago
- hackflip 5y ago
  Those in power will always conflate the two.
dachryn 5y ago
you are abusing the word 'fact' here. A political opinion is by definition not a fact. The whole problem is that nuance is getting lost. In the 80s, a scientist could say 'I have found some troubling signals, there is a 90% chance something bad is going to happen, can we discuss this?' and they would discuss, do risk analysis, come up with mitigating steps. But now it is 'are you sure this will happen' and of course any scientist will say 'it is very probably, but naturally one can never be 100% sure' and the media will slam him for false news and shape it into their politically advantageous story. These factcheckers should try to dilute the extremes, and bring nuance in the debate. That's what we need, and that has nothing to do with being politically correct. This is literally the job of the media, which they start to neglect.
- gruez 5y ago
  >These factcheckers should try to dilute the extremes, and bring nuance in the debate. That's what they should be doing, but instead we get stuff like this[1], which poisons the well for "fact checking" as a whole. [1] https://twitter.com/msnbc/status/785299708730339328 https://twitter.com/msnbc/status/785299708730339328
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    What does that even mean, to "acid wash" a server?

maest 5y ago

You may be conflating "false information" with "politically incorrect statements".

boppo1 5y ago
Google "BMI letter to Mark Zuckerberg"
megumax 5y ago
I'm not an American, but these "fact checks" are not really based on actual facts, but mostly on "correct" opinions. For example, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/06/january-6-attack-capitol-guide-what-we-now-know/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/06/january-6... or https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/04/bidens-claim-that-nobel-winners-say-his-plan-would-reduce-inflation/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/04/bidens-cl...
- marginalia_nu 5y ago
  The whole notion of facts is problematic. Facts are, from a epistemological point of view, things as they are. We do not have access to facts about the physical world, science does not produce such facts. Empirical science is a process that asymptotically approximates facts by eliminating false propositions.
  - YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y ago
    If I take 200mg of cyanid I am dead that's a fact.
    - marginalia_nu 5y ago
      That is a true statement, but it is not a fact in the epistemological sense. When we say a statement is true, what we mean is that the statement agrees with the facts. Or flipped around: The facts are the things that true statements correspond to, the things in themselves.
      - YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y ago
        I think we have different oppinions of what the word fact means but the general consens is something like this. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact
        marginalia_nu 5y ago
        Here is a more nuanced take: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/facts/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/facts/ There is serious problems with facts merely being true statements if you start poking at the edge cases a bit. Consider that there are things that are, and statements that are true. If the two are the same, then all statements that are true must also be things that are. But it is true that if I were to lick my own forehead, it would become wet; yet I cannot lick my own forehead. This is an example of something that is true, yet cannot be. The statements that are true is a larger category than the things that are.
        YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y ago
        I totally understand your standpoint and I will dive deeper with your provided link but as I said before for the general public a true statement is indeed a fact. And just for shits and giggles https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/03/man-claims-to-be-only-person-in-the-world-who-can-lick-their-forehead-8202929/ https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/03/man-claims-to-be-only-person-... haha
        marginalia_nu 5y ago
        Isn't that the entire point of this "fact" checking, to raise the truth above the myriad of things the general public merely believes to be true?
macrowhat 5y ago
hackflip 5y ago
Those in power will always conflate the two.

dachryn 5y ago

you are abusing the word 'fact' here. A political opinion is by definition not a fact. The whole problem is that nuance is getting lost. In the 80s, a scientist could say 'I have found some troubling signals, there is a 90% chance something bad is going to happen, can we discuss this?' and they would discuss, do risk analysis, come up with mitigating steps. But now it is 'are you sure this will happen' and of course any scientist will say 'it is very probably, but naturally one can never be 100% sure' and the media will slam him for false news and shape it into their politically advantageous story. These factcheckers should try to dilute the extremes, and bring nuance in the debate. That's what we need, and that has nothing to do with being politically correct. This is literally the job of the media, which they start to neglect.

gruez 5y ago
>These factcheckers should try to dilute the extremes, and bring nuance in the debate. That's what they should be doing, but instead we get stuff like this[1], which poisons the well for "fact checking" as a whole. [1] https://twitter.com/msnbc/status/785299708730339328 https://twitter.com/msnbc/status/785299708730339328
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  What does that even mean, to "acid wash" a server?