• helenslunch@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    There’s simply no such thing as “nonpartisan fact-checking”. Everyone has a bias, even the “fact checkers”. It’s why the entire concept of “fact checkers” is stupid. If you don’t trust the source reporting the news, why trust the source who’s checking them?

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      In this particular case, it adds to the problem that naturally if you ask one side of a dispute whether they think it’s fair or not, they might be sliiiiiiightly biased…

    • Five@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I disagree, and that’s part of the reason I’m so strongly opposed to Lemmy.World’s use of Dave Van Zandt’s site in their bot. Fact-checking is an essential tool in fighting the waves of fake news polluting the public discourse. But if that fact-checking is partisan, then it only acerbates the problem of people divided on the basics of a shared reality.

      This is why a consortium of fact-checking institutions have joined together to form the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), and laid out a code of principles. You can find a list of signatories as well as vetted organizations on their website. You can read more about those principles here.

      MBFC is not a signatory to the IFCN code of principles. As a partisan organization, it violates the standards that journalists have recognized as essential to restoring trust in the veracity of the news. Partisan fact-checking sites are worse than no fact-checking at all. Just like how the proliferation of fake news undermines the authority of journalism, the growing popularity of a fact-checking site by a political hack like Dave M. Van Zandt undermines the authority of non-partisan fact-checking institutions in the public consciousness.

      • helenslunch@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        that’s part of the reason I’m so strongly opposed to Lemmy.World’s use of Dave Van Zandt’s site in their bot

        You’re upset because their bot isn’t saying what you want it to say. That’s the problem. This bot is presenting itself as an authority on “facts”, as any “fact-checking” institution will do.

        Partisan fact-checking sites are worse than no fact-checking at all.

        Once again, there’s no such thing as nonpartisan fact-checking. Ergo, any fact-checking is worse than no fact-checking.

        Want to fact-check? You’re gonna have to do it yourself by collecting facts from a variety of sources, because any single publisher or “fact-checking” authority is going to lie or mislead their audience and omit facts that don’t fit their narrative.