When Mark Zuckerberg announced an overhaul of fact-checking on Facebook this week, he was damning in his assessment of independent verifiers.
“Fact-checkers have just been too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they have created,” the billionaire said.
One of those little things. I’m known – well, as far as I am known – as a fairly online sort of guy with more than a touch of pendantry. In a couple of areas I’m an actual experts as well.
I’m also regarded as pretty right wing (which I’m in fact not but there we are).
So, in this factchecking boom of this past few years, as they scoured the world for people able to do the work. How often did I get approached to see if I might be able to help, or would be interested in doing so?
You’re right, not once.
Now, it could be I’m just not famous enough. Or, perhaps, that my views on whaty are facts doesn;t accord with those running fact checking organisations. I’d suggest, lightly, that one doesn’t have to be a total conspirazoid loon to think it might be that second reasons. A bit, maybe.
As I would always comment when news articles insisted MOAR fact checking to be implemented: where are the job vacancies being advertised for these checkers? Nowhere. Yet another broken promise.
Meanwhile, Hollywood burns a week before Trump’s inauguration.
Truly, it is a sign.
I’ve looked at fact checkers at times when I’ve used Google News.
But I must admit I’ve been even more sceptical of what they say than of the news reports.
People who use “fact-checked” or “full truth” without irony are fools or knaves
(I’ve had that statement fact-checked and our cat agrees it’s true.)
‘Meta ends fact-checking, Zuckerberg vows to restore free expression on Facebook, Instagram’
Restore? Zuck is a lying turd. Free expression was never allowed.