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".

Publisher vs Platform: Where's the Line, and Does it Matter?

"If Twitter or Facebook's publishing is deemed to be libellous, defamatory or discriminatory, they can be sued. That's the basic, theoretical goal."

Photo by Sora Shimazaki on Pexels (image modified).

One of the hot debating topics of early 2021 centred around the rights and immunities afforded to social media platforms. In particular, whether these vast monoliths of info-dissemination have mutated into publishers, and thus, whether they should be subject to the stricter rules that apply to publishing.

So what defines a publisher? What defines a platform? And what difference does it make? Let's find out…