Facebook Admits "Fact-Check" Is Opinion in Court

Hilarious, really.

The same legal challenge should be issued for *all* of the "fact checking" outfits, Snopes, etc.

What relevant subject matter expertise do the "fact checkers" have that weigh in on all of these disparate topics, especially politicized and now medical-related issues?

With a site like Quora, although I don't use it personally, many of the responses formed to questions are from (have to say alleged, b/c this is the Internet) engineers, doctors, mathematicians, weapons experts, automotive experts, in other words, people that know what they're talking about, not a journalist, polisci major or a lawyer.

Also, on Quora, there really isn't much occurrence of the "fact checking" M.O., which is parsing statements, splitting hairs on verbiage, and then selectively attacking ideas on the margins or tangential concepts of a statement or opinion, while simply ignoring the meat of the issue. This is what you'd expect from a legal professional and not, again, subject matter experts.

Also, remember the meme invented by the MSM during the Trump era, and parroted by their followers:

Alternative Facts

So I guess Facebook took that idea and ran with it.

Fact Check just like any other self-proclaim sites that are on the internet these days with their self-impose righteousness to control your free speech are nothing but big propaganda sites that from the beginning were prop by big tech companies to control information.

That is what they are, if anybody did not see this coming, they are delusional.

I knew from the first time that the first social media was created that is was not going to be good.

And one of the reasons I never, ever signed for any of them.

a reply to: ketsuko

The pendulum is swinging.

Opinions are okay. But they have claimed their "independent fact checks" are expert fact checks that are unbiased, evidence based, etc. These are slapped onto mostly conservative, and mostly anti Covid policy posts, trying to dismiss any questions as "fact checked." That's dishonest and Orwellian.

originally posted by: ketsuko
John Stossel is suing Facebook over the Fact-Check label, and they came right out in court filings and admitted that they cannot be sued for false information and labeling because the label "Fact-Check" is simply an opinion.

"Fact-Check" label is just an opinion.

See Stossel is suing over defamation, and if the fact-check labels are intended to be fact, then they are open to being sued. So when Facebook asserts they are merely opinion, they cannot be sued because an opinion is not defamation. However, the impression the world receives is that these labels are fact.

Most of that is a clip of the legal complaint wherein Facebook openly says that the fact checks are just opinion assertions masquerading under a label people will want to find trustworthy.

And of course, this just underscores the arguments that speech and thought are being openly controlled and censored. The link, btw, contains a link to the full legal document.

a reply to: Madviking

They've used it as basis to censor and ban.

Right, and are frequently cited by rank-and-file as reason to dismiss important information. Even the "this is just opinion" defence is BS. I read some articles charting the conflicts of interest some of these "independent fact checkers" have with relevant organizations they are defending. I think in one case being funded by the very organizations for which critiques are being fact checked. They appear to be more than simply falsely labeled opinions.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Madviking

They've used it as basis to censor and ban.

a reply to: ketsuko

I hope all those that got fact checked and banned would sue Facebook to oblivion, is about time this bias media goes down.

But be aware China is climbing into US media too, they are not better, and they target the young age groups for better manipulation.

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood
Thanks for the 2 minute laugh Nothin!

Thanks. Probably have more fun writing all the nonsense, than folks do reading it.

But the thread just unfolded so nicely, into many things that have been shaping our conversations in the last two years.

Namely me adding the " ™ " on to so many words, is poking fun at how the supposed Elitists™ expect us to just go-along with their nonsense, and a large percentage of folks do.

But in the end : it's all just made-up nonsense, just like all of my nonsense is made-up.

They appoint Specialists™, and Experts™ : and we just automatically defer to them.
It's all over, including here on ATS™.

We see it every day : members begging for some kind of voice of Authority™ to make statements.
Some Appointed™ and Approuved™ voice, to speak Truth™ to us all.
" Can you provide a source to a reliable Peer-Reviewed™ paper on that ? "

In my eyes : ' They™ ' have just been taken-down a peg, from the info in this thread, and that brings joy to my little corner of Crazy™.

They're full of crap.
Always have been.
One of the ways they hold us down is through their false claims to have the right to manage, and decide what is best for the people of the world.

It puts a dent in their whole Technocratic™ premise, IMHO.

One folks start seeing through their smokescreen : maybe things will turn-around.

These are all just my opinions though.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Madviking

They've used it as basis to censor and ban.

In an effort to influence an election on behalf of the democrat party.

BirdFace should be banned from any political editorials or activities for 10 years as punishment for what they did.

The democrat party should be banned from collecting or distributing campaign donations on behalf of it's members for those same 10 years, for exactly the same reason.

But alas, we live in a world currently controlled by brainwashed democrats and their borg queen.

So their vile, dishonest, and even treasonous behavior will likely go unpunished.

And we prepare for round 2.

Democrats appear to be terrified.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: ketsuko
John Stossel is suing Facebook over the Fact-Check label, and they came right out in court filings and admitted that they cannot be sued for false information and labeling because the label "Fact-Check" is simply an opinion.

"Fact-Check" label is just an opinion.

See Stossel is suing over defamation, and if the fact-check labels are intended to be fact, then they are open to being sued. So when Facebook asserts they are merely opinion, they cannot be sued because an opinion is not defamation. However, the impression the world receives is that these labels are fact.

Most of that is a clip of the legal complaint wherein Facebook openly says that the fact checks are just opinion assertions masquerading under a label people will want to find trustworthy.

And of course, this just underscores the arguments that speech and thought are being openly controlled and censored. The link, btw, contains a link to the full legal document.

Accepting any so called "independent fact checkers" disclaimer at face value is hilariously ironic.

"Trust but verify" - Ronald Reagan

This is exactly right. In fact, since the inception of the many "fact check" sites, I have always been cynical. Snoops is the best, as they are always asking for money to continue the propaganda campaign.

My rule is, if its labeled "fact checked" and the fact check disagrees with the original premise, then the original message is probably true.

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ketsuko

Facebook is trying to redefine reality.

Facts aren't arbitrary and subject to opions or feelings.

I agree 99%.

Democrats are trying to redefine reality.

Facts aren't arbitrary and subject to opinions or feelings.

Facebook didn't do this for financial gain, or some human rights cause, they pulled this massive deception in order to help democrats win elections.

They use a lot of “independent fact checking” on posts that put the official covid narrative to question also.. did it to a bunch of my posts saying that “our independent fact checkers have flagged this post for containing misinformation”

originally posted by: Rolicia

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ketsuko

Facebook is trying to redefine reality.

Facts aren't arbitrary and subject to opions or feelings.

I agree 99%.

Democrats are trying to redefine reality.

Facts aren't arbitrary and subject to opinions or feelings.

Facebook didn't do this for financial gain, or some human rights cause, they pulled this massive deception in order to help democrats win elections.

They use a lot of “independent fact checking” on posts that put the official covid narrative to question also.. did it to a bunch of my posts saying that “our independent fact checkers have flagged this post for containing misinformation”

It's how fascists work.

Democrats are too cowardly to just state what they believe, so attempt to fabricate some new 'authority' that "has everyone's best interest in mind".

Only fools the already brainwashed, but that's all they care about anyway.

Sorry your free speech rights were violated by joe & the democrat party.

Interesting news, thanks.