Hacker News Reader

Comment by agomez314 | Hacker News Reader

From reading the abstract, it seems like an exercise in circular logic.

Please expand upon this argument.

"Republican leaning users were banned ~5x more often than Democratic leaning users, but they also shared misinformation more as decided by we-promise-they're-neutral fact checkers and the average American, so there's no discrimination against Republican leaning users"

Which to me means "there's no discrimination unless the fact checkers and average American discriminate", also known as "there's no discrimination unless there's discrimination", which is circular logic.

Claiming misinformation and opinion should be treated as equals is probably the problem. Most open democracies have agreed misinformation can't be treated equally.

Hunter Bidens laptop was fact checked by various outlets but we found out later that was a lie. Who owns the fact checkers?

That's the exception that proves the rule. Fact checkers rarely can be wrong. The overwhelming amount of times they are very correct.

If anyone thinks I am wrong, they can list a dozen times fact checkers were wrong.

What would this list look like? A list of posted removed for being misinformation but that were actually not? Not particularly surprising such a thing does not exist

You mean the claims being made by the Trump camp were unsubstantiated? Because that happened and they were at the time.

For whose definition of misinformation?

I'm not saying they should be treated the same. I'm saying that "there's no discrimination because the majority agrees there's no discrimination" would not be accepted in almost any other scenario.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com