Facebook versus The BMJ: when fact checking goes wrong

Re:Facebook versus The BMJ: when fact checking goes wrong by kryogen1c on Thursday January 20, 2022 @10:17AM (#30009911)

> I wasn't claiming that the BMJ story was demonstrably false[1], and I wasn't defending any action that labeled it as such. The action was to label it as "needs context", a category which specifically exists not to claim that the story is false.

which stories on facebook dont need context?

this is not snark and the question is not trivial. nothing - NOTHING - means the same in isolation as contextually. facebook isnt applying this label equally. theyre selectively moderating and claiming impartiality.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Facebook versus The BMJ: when fact checking goes wrong by tablespoon on Thursday January 20, 2022 @11:01AM (#30010594)

> which stories on facebook dont need context?

Probably not many, but the label is like a "watch your step" sign. People should be careful all the time, but sometimes it's best to remind them. You don't put those signs on everything and you don't put them on nothing, you put them in situations where there's a reason to think it's necessary.

[ Parent | on HN ]