Fact-Checking Story

This story didn't get reported much in Germany, and it's a curious piece. 

This group operates a commentary front.  The name of the 'print' is Tichys Einblick.  Most people (not the liberal crowd) would say that Einblick is probably right-of-center....not far right.  Liberals might disagree and suggest far-far-right.

So Einblick published something that went to Facebook.  Someone hyped up Facebook, and they sought the truth-squad to fact-checking.  The red-pen came out and problems started up for Einblick.

Well....Einblick sought legal help....saying the fact-checking was crap.  Judges came up in Karlsruhr....saying yep, this fact-checking was not ethical or right.  Along the way, they did agree on a couple of points where Einblick might have done some stuff in a poor way.  But the emphasis of this court action is that Facebook and it's fact-checking....screwed up.

This whole story is laid out in Watts Up With That, and they did a good job of explaining things.  It's worth a 10-minute read, and some pondering upon.

The problem with fact-checks, which I came to grasp more than thirty years ago....is that you could write a 40-line story, based on ten facts.  Then you could assign three teams to fact-check it.  You would then get three different versions of the facts at the end.....with one group 'near' to agreeing it was all truthful, one team assessing 50-percent factual, and one team strongly saying the whole thing needs to be taken down, because it doesn't meet their criteria.

In essence, you need fact-checkers who check fact-checkers.  It's rather sad that we've reached this point as a society, and there ought to be better things to do, but we are now deeply engaged in fact-checking.  You could take a one hour period of CNN, and find a dozen things said....which weren't factual. 

Oh, and I probably note this about Einblick's article....it was aimed at climate change, and suggested that 500 scientists from across the globe....suggest that there is no 'climate emergency'.