Thursday, Big League Politics caught a
notoriously liberal “fact-checker” citing the opinion of an anonymous
ANTIFA blogger in order to discredit a Daily
Mail news story.
Big League Politics reported:
October 2, the day after the deadly
massacre in Las Vegas, Daily Mail reported a story
about a group called Melbourne Antifa praising killer Stephen Paddock
as a “comrade” who made “Trump supporting dogs pay.”
DEEP STATE PRIVATE CHAT: Rosenstein Was Blackmailed Into Appointing
The post was deleted after a short
time, and subsequently the entire page was removed from Facebook.
In an effort to carry water for the
political left, Snopes rushed to discredit the Antifa page’s
validity, claiming that that page was not the “real Melbourne Antifa.”
To verify this
claim, Snopes reached out to a truth power-broker, anonymous
blogger “slackbastard,” whose (unconfirmed) real name is
supposedly Andy Fleming.
Feeling uncomfortable with trusting an
anonymous blogger, Big League Politics reached out to Mr.
slackbastard to find out how he – and consequently Snopes –
knew the Melbourne Antifa page was fake. It turns out, they know
because… well… they just know:
Snopes is undoubtably an
important player in media. Facebook uses Snopes’ information
– and the information of organizations like Snopes
– to arbitrate what is true and what is false.
how does Facebook fact-check the fact-checkers?
current fact-checking partners, including Snopes, are all approved by
Poynter/the International Fact-Checking Network, who publishes its
ethics guidelines, which includes the ‘accuracy standard’ that states
fact-checkers, ‘maintain high standards of reporting, writing, and
editing in order to produce work that is as error-free as possible,'”
Lauren Svensson, a Communications Manager at Facebook told Big
fact-checkers follow a standard set of criteria when determining the
veracity of stories on Facebook, and these are based on objective
facts,” she continued.
that is obviously not true. Big League Politics just caught Snopes red-handed
asserting the opinion
of an anonymous blogger as an “objective fact.” In
reality, Facebook fact-checkers can simply declare what is true and
what not by citing a liberal opinion with which they agree.
mentioned by Svensson, the organization that approves Facebook’s
fact-checkers is the Poynter Institute, a media studies non-profit. A
little research into Poynter confirms that it is an unquestionably
Research, George Soros’ Tides Foundation has donated $275,000 to
Poynter. The Ford Foundation, no longer connected with the auto company,
has donated $2.4 million to Poynter. Notably, the Ford Foundation has
also donated millions to Soros’ Center for American Progress and David
Brock’s Media Matters for America. Poynter’s list of donors includes
other liberal foundations like the Knight Foundation and the Carnegie
president is Timothy A. Franklin, who joined in 2014 after serving as
managing editor of Bloomberg News in Washington, D.C. Yes, the man in
charge of Facebook’s “non-partisan” fact-checking organization took over
after holding a plum position at Bloomberg, which is not exactly a
conservative-friendly media outlet.
the way, Poynter owns PolitiFact,
which some consider to be Snopes’ main
to the Capital Research Report:
“A Rasmussen poll before Election Day
found that 29 percent of likely voters believe the media’s
fact-checking of political candidates, while 62 percent think the
media just “skew the facts to help candidates they support.
One only has to look at the
fact-checking statistics over this past election year to understand
why voters have this view. PolitiFact gave its “Pants on Fire” label,
the most severe rank for a lie, to Donald Trump 57 times. Hillary
Clinton earned that distinction just seven times.
A Media Research Center analysis in
June 2016 found that [now-President] Trump received the
“False”/“Mostly False”/ “Pants on Fire” label from PolitiFact’s
Truth-O-Meter 77 percent of the time. Clinton received just
“False”/“Mostly False” for 26 percent of her statements.”
has long been in the business of silencing conservatives. Giving
themselves the power to decide what is true and what is false is simply
the tech giant’s latest Orwellian ruse.