The sites you use have no bias? Absolutely none at all? 

The thing about fact checking isn’t necessarily (or only limited to) the facts being checked. It also includes filtering of posts, info, etc based on discretion.

https://www.politifact.com/

I find to have alot of details to make my own opinions.  Don't just take anything off face value.

https://www.politifact.com/

I find to have alot of details to make my own opinions.  Don't just take anything off face value.

Are you kidding?!?! Politifact is unbiased?  Mmmmkay. 

Was that millennial chick trying to reply while being ignored?  Not too bright. 

Being ID'd as one of the liberal women on FB must have been a trigger?

Rob blocking all thoughts that are different, blaming others with a large hint of sexism.  Won't stop me calling you out on false facts.  I guess if you are far enough right, the middle and even conservatives are liberal.

Are you kidding?!?! Politifact is unbiased?  Mmmmkay.

Did you literally read anything I wrote?  Don't look at their stupid meter thing and read what they reference.  Click the references and make your own judgements.

Did you literally read anything I wrote?  Don't look at their stupid meter thing and read what they reference.

Did I “literally” read everything you wrote? Not all. Just that you think you have unbiased sites. I asked which one and you said Politifact.

Ok. What makes you believe they are unbiased.

And what meter thing?

I personally don’t read Politifact.  So pls educate me why they are so great for unbiased source.

Did I “literally” read everything you wrote? Not all. Just that you think you have unbiased sites. I asked which one and you said Politifact.

Ok. What makes you believe they are unbiased.

And what meter thing?

I personally don’t read Politifact.  So pls educate me why they are so great for unbiased source.

Their meter thing is their way of using their bias to judge a fact.  But in the description they link to all the sources on the subject.  If you look at that you can yourself be a judge if something is true.  Bias free.

The fact checking sites I use have details and references so there is no bias....not sure what ones flap hate.

The ones FB, Twitter and Google hired to "fact check" posts before deleting, demonetizing, locking, hiding behind warnings, and shadow banning the posts and accounts of people they have on their watch lists.

They exist so Social Media can have plausible deniability the THEIR people are blocking Conservative content.  "No us!  The people we HIRED!"

Mostly links to articles not memes.  Meme are mostly posted on profiles not external links.

Everything you share on FB is a link.  It's how that stuff works .... literally.

The ones FB, Twitter and Google hired to "fact check" posts before deleting, demonetizing, locking, hiding behind warnings, and shadow banning the posts and accounts of people they have on their watch lists.

They exist so Social Media can have plausible deniability the THEIR people are blocking Conservative content.  "No us!  The people we HIRED!"

Those I am not sure.  I don't use social media so I have never really come across them.  I always recommend people to do their own searching. 

https://www.facebook.com/journalismproject/programs/third-party-fact-checking

Tried to find out who they use but I am guessing they use a bunch of companies.

What do you want facebook to do?  Please enlighten me.  They appear to be trying to be neutral.  Hiring someone else to judge the truth of posts.  And be as hands off as possible.  Everything right so far.  Do you want them to hire conservative fact checkers?  They are at mercy of who they subcontract.  And it appears they subcontract many people and probably the largest companies.  Instead of complaining how about some suggestions? 

Their meter thing is their way of using their bias to judge a fact.  But in the description they link to all the sources on the subject.  If you look at that you can yourself be a judge if something is true.  Bias free.

I don’t “literally” read their stuff. So I don’t “literally” know about their meter thing.

You “literally” like adverbs, huh?  I mean, do you honestly believe that makes your statements have more effect. Like literally?

Sorry, use of adverbs literally makes me 

Anyways, ok. So it’s unbiased in that PF provided their sources.  Got it. I mean you can literally do that yourself.

Everything you share on FB is a link.  It's how that stuff works .... literally.

Can you just post a meme on your own page and people "share" and like it?  And it doesn't go to an external site?

Did you literally read anything I wrote?  Don't look at their stupid meter thing and read what they reference.  Click the references and make your own judgements.

And what if, hypothetically (see how that *if* works?), the source linked by Politifact are biased?  Do those sites have links to THEIR sources, too??

How far down the rabbit hole do you normally go to verify the accuracy of the supporting info?

Seems like way too much work when the truth is already available on trusted sites.  Fact Checker sites really should not be trusted.  Their record is so por, you ought to spend that time doing research, not being spoon-fed sources by a "fact checker" who is probably a stranger and has an agenda.

I don’t “literally” read their stuff. So I don’t “literally” know about their meter thing.

You “literally” like adverbs, huh?  I mean, do you honestly believe that makes your statements have more effect. Like literally?

Sorry, use of adverbs literally makes me 

Anyways, ok. So it’s unbiased in that PF provided their sources.  Got it. I mean you can literally do that yourself.

Yes but like wikipidea it packs everything into one location for ease.   Lets be real most people especially those that don't check facts are not going to go through the extra effort.  If you make it a bit easier for the masses they will start being more responsible.

Those I am not sure.  I don't use social media so I have never really come across them.  I always recommend people to do their own searching. 

https://www.facebook.com/journalismproject/programs/third-party-fact-checking

Tried to find out who they use but I am guessing they use a bunch of companies.

What do you want facebook to do?  Please enlighten me.  They appear to be trying to be neutral.  Hiring someone else to judge the truth of posts.  And be as hands off as possible.  Everything right so far.  Do you want them to hire conservative fact checkers?  They are at mercy of who they subcontract.  And it appears they subcontract many people and probably the largest companies.  Instead of complaining how about some suggestions?

As an IT guy, you should be curious about Social Media and the things they do.  You don't have to be a subscriber to read about them.

Just don't Google "Are Google's fact checker's biased against Trump?"   

Yes but like wikipidea it packs everything into one location for ease.   Lets be real most people especially those that don't check facts are not going to go through the extra effort.  If you make it a bit easier for the masses they will start being more responsible.

Yeah. The extra effort part is very true. I get on my uncle and sister about that. They tend to take first article they see from a “trusted” site and it’s truth. Drives me fricken bonkers. Same with people who think Wikipedia is all truth/fact.

Can you just post a meme on your own page and people "share" and like it?  And it doesn't go to an external site?

Mostly depends on your security and privacy settings.  If wide open (most trust), yes, you can share a meme or any other image with anyone.  If a recipient has their settings to be more private, they  might have the options to accept the image or delete it.

And what if, hypothetically (see how that *if* works?), the source linked by Politifact are biased?  Do those sites have links to THEIR sources, too??

How far down the rabbit hole do you normally go to verify the accuracy of the supporting info?

Seems like way too much work when the truth is already available on trusted sites.  Fact Checker sites really should not be trusted.  Their record is so por, you ought to spend that time doing research, not being spoon-fed sources by a "fact checker" who is probably a stranger and has an agenda.

What trusted sites?  Breitbart? Your infinite posting of some conservative dude on youtube?  Ever stop and think that your news are swayed to the conservative side?   I call out both msm for being liberal fake news as much as Breitbart being conservative fake news.  Why can't we all just meet in the middle? 

https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news

I use to try get what both sides think.   Independents in the center our sources of un bias news is getting harder and harder to get.

What trusted sites?  Breitbart? Your infinite posting of some conservative dude on youtube?  Ever stop and think that your news are swayed to the conservative side?   I call out both msm for being liberal fake news as much as Breitbart being conservative fake news.  Why can't we all just meet in the middle? 

https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news

I use to try get what both sides think.   Independents in the center our sources of un bias news is getting harder and harder to get.

Unbiased news? Try listen to Perry (half of Perry and Price)

 

That was sarcasm btw...

Yeah. The extra effort part is very true. I get on my uncle and sister about that. They tend to take first article they see from a “trusted” site and it’s truth. Drives me fricken bonkers. Same with people who think Wikipedia is all truth/fact.

Exactly.  I always question, even no matter the site.  But most humans are lazy so you have to meet them half way.  I've been using https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news  as my source of more middle news.  Atleast it gives me all 3 sides. 

What trusted sites?  Breitbart? Your infinite posting of some conservative dude on youtube?  Ever stop and think that your news are swayed to the conservative side?   I call out both msm for being liberal fake news as much as Breitbart being conservative fake news.  Why can't we all just meet in the middle? 

https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news

I use to try get what both sides think.   Independents in the center our sources of un bias news is getting harder and harder to get.

The guy on the YouTube videos is a Liberal-leaning Libertarian who voted for Obama and didn't vote in 2016.

Try getting some actual FACTS before spewing your unsupported accusations and opinions. 

Also, I can't remember using only Breitbart for sources more than a couple of times.  Normally I only post the things they relayed from another reliable source.  You'd have to actually READ what I post to know that for sure.

If this is you having a discussion, you really do suck at it.  You are too lazy to spellcheck, too lazy to read or view the things we post for you, and too lazy to read the things you post for us that fell out of your Google search.

What good are you to anyone here?

**EDIT:  I just read this from you ......  LOL!! 

"Exactly.  I always question, even no matter the site.  But most humans are lazy so you have to meet them half way.  I've been using https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news  as my source of more middle news.  Atleast it gives me all 3 sides. "