"There is no limit to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - President Ronald Reagan.

Buy The Amazon Kindle Store Ebook Edition

Buy The Amazon Kindle Store Ebook Edition
Get the ebook edition here! (Click image.)

Friday, December 10, 2021

Stossel: Facebook Fact-Checking A Pretext Used To Defame Users


Television host John Stossel is suing Facebook and two of its fact-checking partners for defamation over two videos Stossel posted on Facebook.

From what the article states, Facebook is not "fact-checking", it's "opinion-checking".

From The Epoch Times:

Labels placed on posts on Facebook accompanying so-called fact-checks are opinion, lawyers for the social media platform’s parent company said in a recent court filing.

Television host John Stossel sued Facebook and two of its fact-checking partners, Science Feedback and Climate Feedback, earlier this year, accusing the entities of defaming him.

Stossel posted two video reports on Facebook, one of which explored the forest fires devastating California in 2020, including an interview with Michael Shellenberger, a climate change expert.

Stossel said that climate change has made things worse in the state; Shellenberger said climate change played a role but that mismanaged forests were the primary reason for the large fires.

Facebook placed a label over the video, telling users that it was “missing context.”

If users clicked through, they were met with a page on Climate Feedback’s website that stated “Claim – ‘forest fires are caused by poor management. Not by climate change.” and “Verdict: misleading.”

That claim, though, is “contained nowhere in” Stossel’s video, the suit says.

Stossel said he reached out to Climate Feedback and they didn’t respond, but two of the scientists listed as the group’s reviewers admitted they had not reviewed the video.

A similar situation played out with a different video, which explored “environmental alarmists.”

Stossel said the fact-checking process “is nothing more than a pretext used by defendants to defame users with impunity, particularly when defendants disagree with the scientific opinions expressed in user content.”

The case was filed in federal court in northern California.

I hope Stossel prevails. This is one case we should keep a sharp eye on.

I have my own issues with Facebook. My account is currently "restricted" for "at least 90 days" for "shared false information".

These are attached to my account:

 




I agree with Stossel's claim that Facebook's fact-checking process is nothing more than a pretext used by them to defame users with impunity. Items shared by me were all already in the news feed and not originated by me.

Facebook feels it can abuse users with so-called fact-checking that are solely based on their opinion, as its own lawyers stated in court filings. Interesting.

You know what is said about opinions:


To read more, go here.

No comments:

Search This Blog