Why "Fact-Checkers" Need to Fact Right Off

"Fact-checkers" have managed to persuade us that we need to question everything we see on the internet, except for them. That slice of hypocritical dick-logic alone exposes the sham of "fact-checking", and tells us what these people really are."

Image by Bob Leggitt

Last August, when one of the internet's most eminent "fact-checkers" was outed as a liar, a sockpuppet and a thief, we, the discerning public, took one peep above our propaganda feeds, raised an eyebrow, and then promptly resumed linking to his site. Like "fact-checking" could still be worth something after the genre's top dude had admitted simply ripping off shit from news sites. Yes, news sites. As in "don't believe everything you read in the papers".

New "Protection" Extension Blows The Lid Off The Startpage Privacy Charade

"Out front, we find a grand, feelgood gloss, extending around us a warm hug of protection. But behind the curtain, it's just another cybertech company pimping us out to the preds."

Google Tag Manager hitting the firewall after Startpage Privacy Protection waved it through without even a cursory mention.

For years, we've been wondering whether the Startpage search engine might warrant a little more scrutiny. Whether the notion of "actual Google without the tracking" should perhaps be tentatively subjected to the old adage:

"If it sounds too good to be true... It probably is."

But Startpage's recent release of a so-called "privacy protection" extension for browsers, might just have burst the brand's carefully-cultivated integrity bubble for us.

The Ethics and Consequences of Dodging Paywalls

"Some paywalls are so weak that those of us who adhere to high privacy standards online don't even realise they're there."

Photo by Dima Pechurin on Unsplash

It's a really interesting question. Is dodging an online paywall worse than blocking ads? What are the potential consequences when we bypass paywalls and access "premium" content without compensating the provider? If publishers tell us we must pay to read their content, do the technical means by which we evade their 'digital checkout' even matter? Is bypassing paywalls akin to stealing books - something we can do, but know is wrong? That really depends on how "paywalled" the content is.

There are different strengths of paywalling. Some paywalls are rigid lockouts that genuinely do solely let in those who pay. Others essentially employ a sucker-gate, which only monetises the visitors who don't realise they have a choice. The site may, for example, let you in for free if you're hitting a link on Twitter or Facebook, but not if you're responding to an email nudge from an existing subscriber. Let you in for free if you're using this browser setup, but not that one.