• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Fact Checking The Fact Checkers


Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Gene wants to know why I think fact checkers are unreliable. Let's start here and I'll assume Gene won't censor my posts just because in some places they mention issues around pandemic management ...

Censorship and Fact Checking: The Rise of the Technocrats | Phil Magness​

 
Last edited:
This item from a sketchy source is complaining about alleged censorship not about whether fact-checkers are reliable.

I expect a story that fails the fact-checking process will not be published. I don't mind if fake news is censored.

Next.....
 

This item from a sketchy source is complaining about alleged censorship not about whether fact-checkers are reliable.

I expect a story that fails the fact-checking process will not be published. I don't mind if fake news is censored.

Next.....
You haven't even had time to watch the video before commenting. Anyone who doubts this can simply check the length of the video and Gene's timestamp.
 

This one deals directly with information about COVID, so naturally Gene will want to censor it rather than allow the evidence to speak for itself.

Who fact checks the fact checkers ?​

 

This one deals directly with information about COVID, so naturally Gene will want to censor it rather than allow the evidence to speak for itself.

Who fact checks the fact checkers ?​

This is not about one of those fact-checking sites. It's about an argument over a publisher fact-checking something. Nice try.
 
And now for a little fact checking mockery ...

The Fact Checkers​

Again, I'm not seeing evidence that the major fact-checking sites aren't reliable. Bad deflection on your part.

As to watching a bunch of sketchy videos of an hour or long, sorry I don't have that much time to waste. Instead, please provide a summary of what I should look for.
 
This is not about one of those fact-checking sites. It's about an argument over a publisher fact-checking something. Nice try.
And again you couldn't have watched the presentation before commenting — or you would have noticed the quotes from fact checkers on the issue he has the the actual source info for.
 


You haven't even had time to watch the video before commenting. Anyone who doubts this can simply check the length of the video and Gene's timestamp.

You failed to provide anything that relates to the reliability of fact-checking sites. Period. Lots of publications have fact-checking procedures in place for editing a story, but that is not the same thing as a site solely devoted to that process.

You continue to skirt the issue and ignore my request for proof of your claims. You haven't come close.
 
You failed to provide anything that relates to the reliability of fact-checking sites. Period ...
That is your unsubstantiated opinion after not watching the content posted ... and as it will likely remain unsubstantiated, how about we let a few other people weigh in? Or is there anyone else left here anymore?
 

How Propagandists Co-Opted ‘Fact-Checkers’ and the Press to Control the Information Landscape​

[Link violates TOS.]]

At this point Gene has started deleting my posts ( again ) — So I'll leave it up to others to carry this ( if there's any interest ).
 
That is your unsubstantiated opinion after not watching the content posted ... and as it will likely remain unsubstantiated, how about we let a few other people weigh in? Or is there anyone else left here anymore?
You have not substantiated your claim that fact-checking sites aren’t reliable. You’ve made no effort to address the core issue. You’ve just clumsily danced around the subject.
 
As to whether there’s too much fact-checking, I disagree. There’s not nearly enough. Few mainstream media outlets are willing to devote large resources for it. I guess there’s no profit in it.
 
Back
Top