There's nothing more dangerous to dictatorships than the truth, so it's only logical.
Perhaps time to get that wild claim fact checked by yourself.
This is the truth over which I can claim authority. My personal experience, that small portion of objective and infinite reality that became mine, once I'd perceived and diced my tiny slice, stored and explored and retrieved and believed. I know what's true, just ask, I'll tell.
The fact checking I've looked at starts with something like a claim, then dives into context, then lists supporting evidence of either verifying that claim or disproving it, leaning on that supporting evidence.
For fact checking not to be valuable, either the supporting evidence is wrong, the reasoning leading from that to the conclusion is wrong, or something third is wrong.
If that is the case in fact checking, that should absolutely be criticized, and any fact checker with integrity would put up a correction.
For all the vague critique against "fact checking" I've heard, I've never actually seen anyone give examples.
If the critique instead is "they selectively only fact check this and not that", the conclusion should not be that fact checking is bad, but that more is needed.
Snopes is one of the most beloved fact checking services, yet I have seen them make questionable claims. I remember they tried to say once many years ago that snuff videos don't exist. How could they make such a blanket claim? It would have been more honest to say that most of them are fake. Not only would it be possible to make such a video, there is considerable evidence that some have been made. Saddam Hussein and his son are said to have enjoyed watching videos of executions. Now that may be propaganda against Hussein, but he would have been capable of sourcing such material and watching it. At least one murder was streamed on Facebook Live and someone was arrested for it. I'd say that counted as such.
I'm curious about that too. Is there an archive link or something you can provide? I can't seem to find that claim.
This is the funniest example of “Which views exactly? / Oh, you know the ones.”
My favorite was their check on masks in early 2020 - they said that masks do nothing to the airborne viruses and the government will never force you to wear one, people who are walking around with masks are dangerous lunatics who deprive medical workers of much needed PPE. Imagine if it was archived and available now?
Have they rewritten/erased all their erroneous fact checks?
If so, is that bad or good?
Are all the fact checks currently on the website valid?
For a claim you are making, you seem to not be able to find a single piece of evidence. How did you ever find out there was an original article that they edited? Is this purely from personal experience?
> My favorite was their check on masks in early 2020 - they said that masks do nothing to the airborne viruses and the government will never force you to wear one, people who are walking around with masks are dangerous lunatics who deprive medical workers of much needed PPE.
This is what I am asking about
Almost all ice has mineral impurities in it, and is therefore a mineral. Therefore water is actually lava (molten ice) and should be referred to as such.
Your depiction of ice being merely "frozen water" as a fact, and not emphasizing it's equality with lava is classist and clearly agenda driven. /s
(Late reply, sorry)
If your opinion is that fact-checking as a concept is bad then that's one thing, but if not then I'd be interested to know what alternative(s) you'd suggest
Every day I check Truth Social to find out what I think.
The leader who announces, illegally, that all his predecessors' orders are null and void.
I mean we could go on and on, no?