This bot is spreading misinformation.

This bot is spreading rightwing propaganda.

This bot is spamming every post.

This bot is consistently downvoted.

This bot degrades the user experience.

Please ban it.

  • goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    That doesn’t address the issue of mbfc adding it’s own bias in, which is what most have an issue with.

    It just focuses on their factual response and even ends with

    there is an issue with domain level checks like this as not every piece is held to same internal standards

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      it explicitly addresses the baseless accusations of internal bias impacting ratings.

      that’s the very point of these independent studies.

      if mbfc checkers or other fact-checkers allowed their biases into their ratings, those findings would differ from other news fact-checking sources that managed to rate news sources more objectively.

      since their findings range from very similar to nearly identical to other credible news fact-checking sources and importantly there is still zero evidence of their “own bias” affecting their ratings, there’s no base for the accusations.

      just rilers rilin’.

      • goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        They ignored the part of

        MBFC Credibility Rating:

        Which is where the founder loves to play around with ratings based on their own biases.

        The study you linked too goes off of the factual rating which the founder usually doesn’t touch.

        It’s amazing how many they will say factual no failed fact checks then immediately doc rating because of their bias. Especially if publication doesn’t like Israel