Calling Bullshit 9.1: The Spreading of Fake News

[@jennacooley8085]

Looking back at this and seeing Snopes as the arbiter of truth is hilarious.

[@gavinmc5285]

Generative Adversarial News Network

[@EconaelGaming]

The problem with the "fact checkers" is, that they have a political bias as well. Are they really more than just someone's opinion on a blog? How eager are they to refute something which fits their world view?

[@setsytes]

A good factchecker will be a lot more than "just someone's opinion on a blog". Because they will cite their sources, and you can check through them to determine validity for yourself.

[@EconaelGaming]

@@setsytes True, but that still leaves selection bias. Then I might as well do the digging around myself.

[@yesmsg429]

What you relate here is quite depressing. You want people to go to the source and read it. Your students are by definition intellectual and curious and may do so; whereas, the rest just believe the headline. And no it has become so divisive that a WAPO headline is mistrusted by a large segment of the population who then trust Fox or Breitbart. The easy part is finding a source that supports your view. The hard part is objectively stating that the data are no good. P > 5 (yes, 5 :-)

[@OrangeDaddy47]

Snopes stopped being credible a long time ago.

[@owlnyc666]

It stopped being credible to Red Hat Conservatives. Not to Blue Hat Liberals! 🤔😉🇺🇸

[@owlnyc666]

Of course ALL sources that diverge from a political ideology are fake facting sources.

[@owlnyc666]

Of course it was the anti Trump said that spread the fake news about the Pope endorsing Trump. If you fact checked the story on Snopes or Politfact guess what you would find?😉😅🤣🇺🇸

[@ruslan1909]

Are you spreading fake news about fake news..?