Comment on Ban the MBFC bot
goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 week agoThat 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 1 week ago
it quite explicitly addresses these accusations.
credibility is 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.
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 1 week ago
They ignored the part of
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