Saturday, October 8, 2022

More Like "Fact-F*ckers"...

 "The people who must never have power are the humorless. To impossible certainties of rectitude they ally tedium and uniformity..." -- Christopher Hitchens



Another signpost on the road to Perdition has been passed.

Facefuck Facebook has "fact-checked" five MEMES that I have posted today. And then DELETED them. None of them remains in my feed.

Yes, you've read that correctly: they have "fact-checked" jokes.

Then they have arbitrarily deleted content they did not own, from my account, without my permission.

The excuse given is that all contained "doctored" photographs or "non-authentic images".

Which is the fucking point, Assholes...it's a fucking joke.

People with room-temperature IQ's already know it's fake.

Before I continue, I would like to dissect the term "fact check" and then present an argument, gained mainly from inference and experience, as to what, if any, useful purpose a "fact checker" actually serves.

The first thing I've noticed -- and experienced -- is that a "fact checker" is not, as one may assume from the title, checking any facts. As a matter of course, facts seem to be irrelevant to their work, as one has possibly experienced yourself, such as when Facefuck Facebook marks one of your posts as "partly false", neglecting to mention that if something is "partly false" that it stands to reason the rest of it is most likely "mostly true".

And so the baby (the fact(s)), so to speak, gets thrown out with the bathwater (whatever Facefuck decides is "partly false").

The second thing that I've noticed is that "fact checkers" rarely check anything you've actually posted for it's veracity. Instead, it appears as if someone is checking their own assumption of what the offending article or photo was intended to represent or say, and then, having substituted personal assumption for literal fact, decided that the assumption is a good enough reason as any, therefore, anything else is most certainly false.

And finally, another thing I've noticed is that all of this "fact checking" only goes one way. That is to say, if a meme or article or statement points out a fallacy, contradiction, or merely makes fun of, the leftist viewpoint, it is automatically rejected as "fake news" or "false information".

Of course, the people who do these sorts of things claim to only have the highest, most-noble of intentions -- to protect the community at large from the evils of 'disinformation' (which is never defined) -- and the fact (oh, right, we don't DO facts!) that in the process of censorship the fact checker, herself (it's usually a 'she'), is actually serving the process of disinformation, often by obscuring or pronouncing "false" anything she happens to disagree with.

Or, rather, gets paid to disagree with. 

So, what, exactly is a fact checker and what do they do?

Ostensibly, they ensure that anything posted online has verifiable information in it; something that can be independently validated.

In practice, these are exercises in the most base form of censorship, politically motivated, and undertaken by organizations with important-sounding names but shadowy finances and origins.

Which is the first indication that these are truly political organs and not public advocates.

And much like Communism wraps itself in the flag of virtue, so too do these idiots.

In the meantime, you can't even share an obvious joke on Facefuck Facebook with your friends (which is how Facefuck makes money, isn't it?) without having a Stasi agent looking over your electronic shoulder to ensure that said joke is politically correct.

That activity alone should alarm you because it indicates that not only is the left, in general, prepared to engage in censorship but that a corporation which alternately claims to be a private business and a public utility (whichever description is most-convenient at any given moment) is willing to help them do it.

Someone find out how much FB stock George Soros owns, quick.

In the interests of Free Speech, here were the five "offending" memes. You be the judge.








But somehow this one was a-okay...







3 comments:

GMay said...

The CTV one is most likely fake, but I really like the air of legitimacy, which of course is why it runs afoul of the people its mocking.

It's right up there with my favorite meme along those lines someone did with the BBC publishing one of those insipid "how to talk to your friends who [don't hold the proper leftist opinions]" screeds. This one was about "conspiracy theories", and someone had shopped an image of one guy apologizing to the other because he was right about everything.

Some pinch-faced scold probably "fact-checked" that one too.

I'm stumped on trying to figure out a legitimate reason for nuking the others. Having read those two articles by the "Paper of Record's" "disinformation" commissar, I mean specialist, Stuart Thompson, and morbidly admiring the complete lack of any contrition for stepping all over his dick in the previous article, the only thing I can come up with is that maybe someone changed the date stamp on the second one? I'm too lazy to check, but that's what I'm going with.

Not that it's a legitimate reason to nuke it, but they're fine going with the flimsiest excuses.

Matthew Noto said...

The CTV one is fake. The people who produced it never claimed otherwise. But FB decided that since there are people with no sense of humor and no intellectual curiosity, that they should ban it, anyway, lest someone actually believe it.,

stlcdr said...

There was a point where ‘fake’ or ‘hoax’ articles and information were simply jokes or humor. It said more about the believer than those who created it. It demonstrated how gullible people could be - an experiment If you will. The point that one was supposed to take what one sees or hears with skepticism; don’t take everything at face value.

See the BBC and the spaghetti harvests, and war of the worlds.

Society is retrograding. The main news outlets rely on that, and use their legitimacy (sic) to spread the same fake or hoax news articles, with just enough plausible deniability, or shallow reporting. Whatever happened to trust but verify? (Ah, the ‘verify’ has been censored by our bettors as racist/sexist/bigoted and anyone who does so is a white supremest).