Tag: fact checkers

Twitter Fact Checkers Just Revealed Their Whole Entire Backside as Shameless Shills For Big Pharma

Fact checkers at Twitter and elsewhere furiously took to their keyboards yesterday in defense of America’s Big Pharma Covid profiteers. This time, the fact checkers circled the wagons around Pfizer, which is developing an expensive drug that serves a suspiciously similar function to the cheap, time-tested, generic drug ivermectin. This time, Twitter’s approved fact checkers trafficked in deception, misinformation, and carefully worded lies, as they so often do, in order to “debunk” an article from ZeroHedge.

Let’s dissect their work.

Here is what Twitter highlighted at the top of their “fact check”:

Pfizer is not developing a version of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, according to fact-checkers and medical professionals

A new oral drug being produced by Pfizer is not a repackaged version of the antibacterial medication often used to prevent parasites in animals, according to PolitiFact, Snopes and Full Fact. While the drugs share similar functions and effects, this does not mean they are identical or interchangeable, according to fact-checkers. Pfizer’s new oral drug “is not similar to that of an animal medicine and is not the same mechanism,” according to a statement from the company.

Further on down the page, Twitter deigned to tell us “What We Need to Know.” Thanks, Twitter!

What you need to know

– Pfizer told Snopes that the new drug is “designed to block the activity of the main protease enzyme that the coronavirus needs to replicate”

– Dr. Stephen Griffin, a virologist at Leeds Institute of Medical Research, told Full Fact that the two drugs “are extremely structurally different”

– Health agencies around the globe have declined to authorize ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, and studies on its potential use have been inconclusive, according to FactCheck.org

Here’s more from the Twitter-approved fact checkers, who we can obviously trust so much. They are overly fixated on the fact that  ivermectin and the new Pfizer drug do not share the same chemical structures.

So, Twitter and our highly trusted “Fact Checkers” tell us that the two drugs are totally different, because they have a different chemical structure, which makes the Zero Hedge totally false, right? An open and shut case?

Keep reading

Facebook won’t respond to accusations it “asked fact-checking partners to retroactively change their findings”

“The Facebook Files” is an in-depth series based on leaked internal documents that expose the way social media giant Facebook views its platform and its social impact. It was released earlier this week.

Several factors are raised in The Journal’s reporting, including Instagram’s negative impact on minors, the implications of algorithmic changes on political discourse, and Facebook’s protection of influential users. Facebook’s internal research opposes its public assertions, and the company has internalized its societal ills while publicizing its positives in the report.

The Journal also highlighted that their decisions may not be as impartial as they appear on the surface and that “Facebook has asked fact-checking partners to retroactively change their findings on posts from high-profile accounts.”

The outlet also accused Facebook of having “waived standard punishments for propagating what it classifies as misinformation and even altered planned changes to its algorithms to avoid political fallout.”

Keep reading

MSM Refusing to Fact Check Themselves on Ivermectin Lie Is the Nail in the Coffin of Their Credibility

Everyone reading this article right now has likely experienced or knows someone who has experienced some form of social media censorship. Whether your entirely peaceful post received a “fact check” label, or was “removed for violating community guidelines” or you were unceremoniously silenced for life, Facebook and Twitter censorship affects millions. No matter what degree of big tech censorship you have faced, there is a common theme with all forms of it — it is censorship for thee, not for me.

When an independent news outlet puts out information that is verifiably factual but challenges the establishment narrative on issues, often times, this will trigger a fact check. As a result of the “fact check” that news outlet’s social media reach is diminished, all of their followers receive a notice that they shared false information, and in order to get the “fact check” lifted, that outlet has to appeal the decision and prove to the fact checker that there was never anything reported that was false.

The Free Thought Project knows this process all too well as we have a target on our backs and we have successfully refuted and overturned nearly  every fact check from the outlets who respond to our appeals. But even after the fact check is reversed, the damage is done. Even though they were all given a notification that they shared possibly false information, our users never get a notice that the ruling was overturned and our information was vindicated.

Our name is run through the mud on the public stage and when it’s finally cleared, it happens behind closed doors and no one see it.

Quite to the contrary, however, the establishment media can and does frequently publish information that is verifiably false and they face little to no recourse at all — though now, the heavily left-leaning fact checkers are becoming more prone to calling out right wing mainstream media like FOX. But even then, these media goliaths face almost no backlash for putting out false information that has led to mass suffering and even wars. 

To prove this point, we need only look at the recent push by many in the leftist establishment media to discredit the drug ivermectin. Whether or not it can help prevent covid is moot but one thing is for certain, blow hards like Rachel Maddow and the rest of the big pharma shills who do nothing but repeat the establishment’s narrative — have zero business telling you what to do with it. They are not doctors or scientists, they are paid actors whose jobs consist of rattling off the day’s talking points to keep their party followers believing an established narrative.

Case in point: “Horse dewormer.” Where are the ‘Fact-Checkers’ on the media referring to Ivermectin as a “live stock drug” or “horse dewormer”? While it is used for these things, it was invented by Japanese scientist Satoshi Omura who won the Nobel Prize for its discovery which saved millions of human lives.

Ivermectin is catalogued by the WHO as an essential medicine and referred to as a “magic bullet” for the global health of humans — not horses.

But these facts matter not to the establishment’s Praetorian guard. The mainstream is allowed to spout false information about medicine that could likely be leading to the needless suffering and even deaths of countless individuals. And they do so with impunity.

Recently, the NBC affiliate in Oklahoma, KFOR, ran a verifiably false news piece about Ivermectin overdoses backing up hospitals.

Keep reading

‘Fact-Checkers’ Rush to ‘Correct’ Grieving Parents

America’s leading “fact-checkers” describe themselves as “independent.” But watching their energetic defenses of President Joe Biden’s politically damaging behavior reveals they are taking a side. In the first 100 days, I found PolitiFact evaluated Biden’s critics eight times more often than they “fact-checked” the president.

It was truly shocking when Biden was caught on video checking his watch at Dover Air Force Base on Aug. 29 as the caskets of American soldiers were unloaded into vans. Both Snopes and USA Today felt the urgent, throbbing need to claim that the grieving family members who complained were wrong.

Keep reading

Facebook “fact checker” worked to bankrupt conservative and indy news sites by convincing advertisers to drop them

Facebook and other social media behemoths have consistently said they’re not biased against conservatives and independent publishers, and just as often as they deny it they are proven to be liars.

That happened again this past week and in a big way.

The National Pulse managed to unearth new evidence indicating that a so-called “fact checker” Facebook and TikTok, among other platforms, “attempted to coerce advertisers into dropping conservative media outlets as clients in social media posts,” the outlet reported.

The site said that it discovered Twitter posts from Lead Stories copy editor Leslie Lapides “follow the outlet’s founder and Editor-in-Chief Alan Duke repeatedly denying allegations of left-wing bias.”

But in fact, despite those denials, Lapides has posted at least four tweets showing support for Sleeping Giants, a left-wing internet activist organization whose members target advertisers seen on conservative sites like Breitbart News.

The activist group, which says it was formed to “make bigotry and sexism less profitable,” is well-known for convincing advertisers to drop listings on right-leaning sites through bullying campaigns, many of which have successfully bankrupted conservative media outlets.

Keep reading

The Co-Founder Of The Fact-Checking Site Snopes Was Writing Plagiarized Articles Under A Fake Name

David Mikkelson, the co-founder of the fact-checking website Snopes, has long presented himself as the arbiter of truth online, a bulwark in the fight against rumors and fake news. But he has been lying to the site’s tens of millions of readers: A BuzzFeed News investigation has found that between 2015 and 2019, Mikkelson wrote and published dozens of articles containing material plagiarized from news outlets such as the Guardian and the LA Times.

After inquiries from BuzzFeed News, Snopes conducted an internal review and confirmed that under a pseudonym, the Snopes byline, and his own name, Mikkelson wrote and published 54 articles with plagiarized material. The articles include such topics as same-sex marriage licenses and the death of musician David Bowie.

Snopes VP of Editorial and Managing Editor Doreen Marchionni suspended Mikkelson from editorial duties pending “a comprehensive internal investigation.” He remains an officer and a 50% shareholder of the company.

“Our internal research so far has found a total of 54 stories Mikkelson published that used appropriated material, including all of the stories Buzzfeed shared with us,” Marchionni and Snopes Chief Operating Officer Vinny Green said in a statement.

Keep reading