= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RomeoStevens comments on ClearerThinking's Fact-Checking 2.0 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (40)
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.
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.
That's fair.