Who fact-checks the fact-checkers? Whatever you do, don’t ask Marianna Spring. If new revelations are to be believed, the BBC’s ‘disinformation and social-media correspondent’ – who has been showered with awards, praise, broadsheet profiles and glossy photoshoots for her putative one-woman stand against online lies and conspiracy theories – can’t even be trusted to produce a relatively factual CV.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Samizdata quote of the day – Who fact-checks the fact-checkers?Samizdata Illuminatus (Arkham, Massachusetts) · Media & Journalism · Slogans & Quotations · UK affairs September 13th, 2023 |
 16 comments to Samizdata quote of the day – Who fact-checks the fact-checkers? |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
The story of Ms Spring suggests one reason why there are so many memes circulating about both the concept of ‘fact checkers’ and the kind of person who is employed to perform such work.
Surprise! Not.
Free and open discussion is the best way to arrive at the closest approximation to the truth. This was established hundreds of years ago. Anyone who wishes to censor the views of others demonstrates that they themselves hold views that they are unable to defend in the free market of ideas. The BBC has been pumping out disinformation about the climate for decades, often citing scientists whom they often fail to name, merely saying “scientists say” as if that denotes scientific authority on its own. These unnamed scientists predicted a drought for the UK at the beginning of this year.
It is not just the BBC – it is the “Fact Checkers” generally, they are Collectivist establishment types – they are there to cover up the truth, and to smear people who try and tell the truth.
We all know this, there is no shock here – a “Fact Checker” or “Independent Fact Checkers” (there are groups who specialise in offering this “service” to Corporations such as Facebook) is, today, just another way of saying LIAR.
The “Fact Checkers” are LIARS – that is not some accident, lying is what they are PAID to do.
If this female was given her job based on lies put in her CV, there is a criminal offence of obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception, in which case, she could be sacked, prosecuted, and made to pay back any monies she has received in salaries and benefits as a result of this deception. However, I wonder if Al Beeb will treat one of their own in such a manner?
Her feet wouldn’t have touched the ground if she had set about fact checking the Beeb’s climate propaganda. E.G. one third of Pakistan flooded when the actual figure was one eighth.
A product for the consumption by the gullible. She is, by no means the only one.
They are all paid by Facebook, the Coke brothers, GAVI, The B&M foundation, yada yada. It is there on their ‘about us’ page of the ‘fact check’ websites.
It’s not about ‘facts’, nor the ‘truth’, it’s about cultivating the preferred narrative.
The mighty Eugyppius has weighed in on this. Hilarious as usual:
https://twitter.com/eugyppius1/status/1702341719692345451
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66211285
This rather bizarre article was for a while the lead story on the bbc sports page although it has now been relegated to second behind the ongoing tribulations of Jadon Sancho.
I had been blissfully unaware, although on reflection it isn’t really surprising, that there was an “Environmental Sustainability Lead – BBC Sport”. I wonder what his qualifications are?
“Owns many red crayons”?
That USA map was scarier than actually being here was.
More on fact checkers from Guido:-
Long-time BBC reporter and former face of the Beeb’s Reality Check Chris Morris was announced as Will Moy’s successor over at Full Fact today.
https://order-order.com/2023/09/14/fact-check-new-full-fact-boss-blasted-brexit/
We know who the bbc bloke but who or what is “Full Fact”?
Who we are
Bad information ruins lives. We’re a team of independent fact checkers and campaigners who find, expose and counter the harm it does.
OK so where do you get your funding?
Their 2 biggest donors are Google and Facebook. Funny that. Still at least they’re not government funded, well not directly anyway.
Quis facticabit factificatores?, as it were.
“Quis facticabit factificatores?”
Perfect 😉
The function of the “Fact Checkers” is to LIE – to pretend that the truth is not the truth, and that lies are the truth.
Lying is what the “Fact Checkers” are meant to do – it is what they are for. It was their employers or clients, whether government or Corporate, want and require.
I thought that was barristers.
Or am I being unfair?
John – yes I think you are being a bit unfair to barristers. Barristers do not have to lie or even mislead – but that is, basically, the job description of a “Fact Checker” or “Independent Fact Checker”.