The Unanimously Liberal Tilt Of The ‘Fact-Checkers’

If you think they are wrong, find some facts of your own and challenge them, instead of assuming they are wrong.
It really is that simple.

 

That is not how fact or logic works. The people making the positive claim fact checkers must prove that they are.

We don't establish fact by declaring something and then demanding everyone else prove it wrong. If we did unicorns existing would be fact because you can't prove that they don't.

 

And how do you think your fraudulent site was proven to be fraudulent if someone couldn't prove it was fraudulent.
Of course you can prove unicorns don't exist. Ask those who say they do, to produce one.

 

How can a honest person function knowing that your entire ideology is grounded in bullcrap?

 

Best ask a campaigning Christian.

 

I will and I have.

Cute dog by the way.

 

I'll let her know you think so.
She thinks she is cute too

 

I never claimed anything was fraudulent, I claimed effect checkers don't exist.

So you understand you have to prove fact checkers exist and more than just a name only.

 

I never said differently.
They do the research, publish the facts.
It is up to you to disprove them.
Of course fact checkers exist. Otherwise you wouldn't be trying to discredit them.

 

I claim anyone can make without evidence it's just a claim.

no it isn't that's not how burden of proof works. You claim they do the research you must prove that.

I don't have to disprove that just because they call themselves something.

they have no credibility in the first place just because they say the word fact in their name doesn't mean they have anything to do with it.

Once again you claimed they did the research you must prove that.

 

Look.
Any fact check site worth its salt lists all its sources and uses quotes to support the facts. Have you actually read any of them??
If you want to contest them, go ahead.
They are called fact check because they are checking fact.
There is no reason why you can't actually fact check the fact checkers instead of kevetching about what they are called and can't produce one example of their not being facts other than the one example that hit the media by dint of being unusual.
You throw out an accusation...use some facts to prove them.

 

Your hyper-partisan contempt for the truth is blatant.

In fact, a credible witness reluctantly testified under oath, and even Kavanaugh's nominator acknowledged her credibility:

President Trump on Friday called the woman accusing his Supreme Court nominee, Judge Brett Kavanaugh,
of attempted rape in high school “credible” a day after she testified about the alleged assault on Capitol Hill.
Ford described to the Senate Judiciary Committee in emotional testimony on Thursday her claim that Brett Kavanaugh
pinned her to a bed at a party when they were both in high school, covered her mouth, and tried to remove her clothes
before she managed to escape.

NATIONAL REVIEW

​

 

that's just another claim that you can't support.

That's what I've been doing.

no they're called the fact checkers to trick people into believing them.

it's still not my burden to prove them wrong that's not how burden of proof works.

You make claims like people who call them fact checkers really are fact checkers you prove them that's your burden.

 

Anyone who doesn't check the veracity of a fact checking site is an idiot.
Do you?

 

There's no such thing as fact checkers. You should verify facts for yourself and not just someone else to do it for you.

But if you want to believe in this nonsense then you do you.

 

It is those supposed “fact checkers” who engage in sheer lies and fantasies and MBFC is the worst of them all by far.

 

I do assume that all who use MBFC to do their thinking for them are sheer and utter fools.

 

Media Bias Fact Check Literally is a written opinion site by a man with a ""Communications Degree in college"" Dave Van Zandt

The flagrant and simplistic nature of these bogus critiques suggests that Media Bias Fact Check is either inept and/or dishonest.
https://www.justfactsdaily.com/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-dishonest

Media Bias/Fact Check bills itself as "The most comprehensive media bias resource." It's run by Dave Van Zandt, making it fair to say it's run by "some guy" ("Dave studied Communications in college" is his main claim to expertise).
We have nothing against "some guy" possessing expertise despite a lack of qualifications, of course. One doesn't need a degree or awards (or audience) to be right about stuff. But is Van Zandt and his Media Bias/Fact Check right about PolitiFact?
https://www.politifactbias.com/2017/10/can-you-trust-what-media-biasfact-check.html

Don't trust Fact checkers, especially not this one. It favors fake news on the left, and to true sites that are not on the mainstream media, it labels as conspiracy theory and junk pseudo science, when the truth is just the opposite. This website is as biased and as full of lies as you get.
https://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/mediabiasfactcheck.com

Conservatives have criticized the liberal "fact-checking" website for being subjective and often outright false.[19][20][21] On their "10 Best Fact Checking Sites," they list several objectively false and generally inaccurate left-wing "fact-checkers," including PolitiFact, Snopes, and the Fact Checker by the Washington Post.[22]
Media Bias Fact Check sources its information from the Anti-Defamation League and the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center in order to inaccurately label right-wing websites and organizations as "questionable" sources according to Robert Spencer, who wrote to Media Bias/Fact Check's editor describing the attacks on his website, Jihad Watch, as "pure libel," afterward claiming he received no response from the editor.[23]
https://conservapedia.com/Media_Bias_Fact_Check
Perhaps the most jarring instance of these scams is a site called “Media Bias Fact Check” which turns out to be just one guy making up whatever he feels like about news outlets, based on what he admits is his personal opinion, while typically providing no evidence – and then altering the ratings of news outlets who point out his scam.
https://www.palmerreport.com/politics/palmer-report-exclusive-media-bias-fact-check/2115/

Media Bias Fact Check Is the Biggest Scammer on the Internet
https://www.independentsentinel.com/media-bias-fact-checker-biggest-scammer-on-the-internet/

Overall, such fallacious attacks on outsider-opinion represent an effort to strangle social discourse from the top down. In this writer’s opinion, sites like Media Bias Fact Check constitute a desperate retaliatory measure in the wake of the legacy media’s loss of collective attention, and seek to reinforce narrative control in the hands of organizations like the Atlantic Council while smearing reliable sources of scientific journalism like WikiLeaks.
https://www.investmentwatchblog.com...ikileaks-supports-western-propaganda-machine/

If Media Bias Fact Check were to be given a rating, they would be “Left” with “Mixed” honesty. Interestingly enough, they don’t rate themselves. Not that it matters, they’d certainly put themselves squarely in the middle as “Least Biased” with “High” ratings for honesty, neither of which are even remotely true
https://www.tnvalleytalks.com/topic/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-just-dishonest
NewsGuard Rates OANN, Newsmax, LifeNews Less Credible than Chinese State-Run Media
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/f...rd-newsguard-rates-oann-newsmax-lifenews-less

 

All of the above is so right on and well said. Thanks for saying it here.

 

None of which either implies or says that fact check sites do not exist or are generally untrustworthy.
Their veracity is up to you to determine.
On a related note, there is mounting evidence that customer approval ratings for on line sales companies are being filtered and manipulated.
Caveat Emptor.
However this too does not imply that customer ratings do not exist.

 

Thats what I do .. and yeah .. turns out indeed these "Fact Check" sites often don't have the facts straight .. and many with significant political bias. Just the way it is these days .. Truth gets canceled - . integrity an endangered species.