RomeoStevens comments on ClearerThinking's Fact-Checking 2.0 - Less Wrong

23 Post author: Stefan_Schubert 22 October 2015 09:16PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (40)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RomeoStevens 23 October 2015 09:12:53PM 6 points [-]

This a is a fully general counterargument to everything from consumer reports to examine.com to the organic movement. Basically anything that attempts to help people be better informed can be accused of lost purposes.

Comment author: [deleted] 24 October 2015 05:06:05PM *  5 points [-]

i think you could steelman this as "You should only use fact checkers who don't have significant adverse incentives". Consumer Reports and Examine.com fit the bill, politifact may not.

Comment author: RomeoStevens 26 October 2015 06:38:52AM 1 point [-]

That's fair.