This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Wisbech Eagle  Truro Cornwall 27 Aug 23 11.06pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
It also suggests fact checkers aren't the irrefutable providers of objectivity as they've been portrayed. What it actually suggests is that trust can be improved by ensuring that any unconscious biases are removed if a mixed team do the analysis. I don’t think I have ever heard them described in the way you suggest. I think they provide a valuable service in looking into claims and providing evidence that can be assessed by the reader.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Aug 23 11.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Most of these so called fact checkers are designed to make lies sound truthful and degeneracy respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. Completely the opposite is true. They are designed to expose lies.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Aug 23 11.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by eaglesdare
That's a bit rich comming from you. What if an individual judges for themselves in a way you don't like? Are they then mis informed? Cancelled? Far right? Conspiracy theorist? Etc.... I have never suggested people should not make their own minds up. Only that before doing so they should take care to be in possession of the facts. The problem is that so many are not. They just think they are. Reading the fact checkers can throw up information and throw out disinformation. That helps to find the truth.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| eaglesdare 27 Aug 23 11.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I have never suggested people should not make their own minds up. Only that before doing so they should take care to be in possession of the facts. The problem is that so many are not. They just think they are. Reading the fact checkers can throw up information and throw out disinformation. That helps to find the truth. So essentially you are saying people should do and think as they are told. If they make a judgement that you don't like then they are wrong and misinformed. Fact checkers clearly have agendas and are paid so. It's the same the YouTube videos you don't like. They make money from thier opinions and agendas. The fact checkers make money based on agendas or as they are directed.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Aug 23 11.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
People should not watch the Rand Paul clip. They should try to view the whole of the hearing. Any clip is edited to tell the story those doing the clipping want to tell. A known sceptic Senator with an agenda, grandstanding during a televised hearing by taking things out of context and asking loaded questions cannot be trusted to be pursuing the truth.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  27 Aug 23 11.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
What it actually suggests is that trust can be improved by ensuring that any unconscious biases are removed if a mixed team do the analysis. I don’t think I have ever heard them described in the way you suggest. I think they provide a valuable service in looking into claims and providing evidence that can be assessed by the reader. If the reader is responsible for the assessment they'd be better off not having the information influenced by others' unconscious bias under the pretence of objectivity.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| eaglesdare 27 Aug 23 11.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
People should not watch the Rand Paul clip. They should try to view the whole of the hearing. Any clip is edited to tell the story those doing the clipping want to tell. A known sceptic Senator with an agenda, grandstanding during a televised hearing by taking things out of context and asking loaded questions cannot be trusted to be pursuing the truth. I thought we are supposed to judge these things for ourselves? I think I will watch the clip now.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Aug 23 11.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by eaglesdare
So essentially you are saying people should do and think as they are told. If they make a judgement that you don't like then they are wrong and misinformed. Fact checkers clearly have agendas and are paid so. It's the same the YouTube videos you don't like. They make money from thier opinions and agendas. The fact checkers make money based on agendas or as they are directed. Of course fact checkers have agendas and get paid. They cannot operate without finance. Their agenda is to check facts. It’s on the tin! Who wants them to do that? Those who need to stop the spread of misinformation, or risk having it stopped for them by unwanted regulations. I want people to be informed. Not misinformed. After that people can hold whatever opinion they like but until they do their opinion is not valid.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Aug 23 11.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by eaglesdare
I thought we are supposed to judge these things for ourselves? I think I will watch the clip now. Watch it by all means but remember it won’t inform. It’s only a clip. You will need to watch the whole hearing and then research the references made to come to a balanced conclusion.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| eaglesdare 27 Aug 23 11.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Of course fact checkers have agendas and get paid. They cannot operate without finance. Their agenda is to check facts. It’s on the tin! Who wants them to do that? Those who need to stop the spread of misinformation, or risk having it stopped for them by unwanted regulations. I want people to be informed. Not misinformed. After that people can hold whatever opinion they like but until they do their opinion is not valid. But when when people are informed and make decisions or opinions that you don't like they are misinformed?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 27 Aug 23 11.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
If the reader is responsible for the assessment they'd be better off not having the information influenced by others' unconscious bias under the pretence of objectivity. Which is why the improvements are suggested. However, unconscious bias or not if falsehoods are exposed that exposure is still valuable.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 27 Aug 23 11.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Which is why the improvements are suggested. However, unconscious bias or not if falsehoods are exposed that exposure is still valuable. Not if other falsehoods are suggested as "truth". That is nothing but bias confirmation.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.