this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2025
306 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
61242 readers
6526 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Honestly its probably for the best. When people started investigating the "Fact checkers", it was discovered that they didn't know anything about the checks that were attributed to them.
I mean that's a problem... but it sounds like the problem gets worse.
Realistically fact checking always lies in the problem of how do we know the fact checkers aren't corrupted. Unfortunately popular vote seems just as dangerous way of trying to back it.
Fact checkers don't have to be expert on the subject, often all it requires is some googling and a quick glimpse at some research paper.
No, people reading scholastic documents and drawing the wrong conclusions is how we got into this mess.
Yeah, because Google is completely nonbiased.
Note the lowercase "googling". Nobody says "duckduckgoing", "binging", "yahooing", or even "searnging".
Huh. Facebook would never either knowingly or because they are money grubbing POSs hire incompetent fact checkers and then when their incompetency comes to light use that as an excuse to scrap the whole thing... Never!
The fact checkers were not incompetent, they weren't involved at all.