Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

11 Comments

  1. Social media, just like mainstream media, alternate media and independent media, they are all just avenues of information. Two of these avenues are owned by big-money interests. Nonetheless, it is easy to tell who is really peddling disinformation by the lack of verifiable evidence being presented within any given news piece and if you think that disinformation is limited to just social media, then as George Galloway loves to exalt – I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

  2. I would argue that fact checking is a form of control in that is stifles debate which is much needed.
    Established facts by general consensus by all means fact check and challenge, everything else is open to debate.
    Challenging the Genocide is Gaza is a perfect example where opinions for genocide are shut down and labeled antisemitic. Time to change the narrative.

  3. Never mind, the new Facebook moderation criteria still maintains the most important ‘fact checking’ rule- banning questioning why all regime media especially Radio NZ and the NZ Herald 100% support the genocide of the Palestinian people. It couldn’t possibly be for any nefarious reason, could it?

  4. Fingrinn is right. It was as much censorship as fact-checking at its best. At its worst it was inconsistent and subjective. People need to grow up and fact-check for themselves. It is not hard! Here is The Economist’s take on it: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/01/08/mark-zuckerbergs-u-turn-on-fact-checking-is-craven-but-correct?utm_campaign=r.twib-newsletter&utm_medium=email.internal-newsletter.np&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=1/9/2025&utm_id=2028927

Comments are closed.