By the way, clicking on a fact on Chrome iOS is not loading anything.
Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
41–50 of 303 posts
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#42By the way, clicking on a fact on Chrome iOS is not loading anything.
Will investigate, thanks for letting me know!
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#43Been experimenting with building tools to make fact checking more transparent and reusable for a few years now, this is the latest iteration of that project. Feedback appreciated!
Looks like you've done great work on this.
It's clean and easy to use and I don't necessarily see a huge problem with "noise" diluting the "facts".
I certainly appreciate both the goal and work you've done to accomplish it.
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#44This is pretty awesome. Any time I open any article, the first thing I do is try to follow the trail of links/sources back to the primary sources and read that instead. If I can't find one, I don't trust the article.
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#45This is pretty awesome. Any time I open any article, the first thing I do is try to follow the trail of links/sources back to the primary sources and read that instead. If I can't find one, I don't trust the article.
I'm the exact same way, that's why I built this :)
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Equally important : Don't display reputation to users other than themselves. Humans will attributes higher trust level to individuals with higher reputation, despite them occasionally dropping false claims.
Does it really make sense to call it "reputation" if you're the only one that can see it?
On HN they call it Karma
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#47Been experimenting with building tools to make fact checking more transparent and reusable for a few years now, this is the latest iteration of that project. Feedback appreciated!
For this to be useful at scale, you will need to not just design this for good-faith users, but also against bad-faith actors. If this catches on, it will become a target of coordinated disinformation campaigns. Have you been thinking about what to do against that?
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#48So, your examples are all "reporting about court cases" and you use court documents as your citations for facts. Court cases are as good as we have for determining facts, I suppose. (Though the error rate in court cases is quite high!) But 99.9999% of reporting isn't about court cases. Most reporting isn't about issues that will ever be litigated, and even those things that will be litigated, haven't been at the time…
Call me a pedant, but I'd say OP is enabling "consensus checking"
I find the present day's fact checking wave is a misnomer. In a world where something is false, but sourced, most of what we call fact-checking would only reinforce mistruths.
e.g.
The ratio of circumference to diameter is exactly three to one [1][2][3]
[1]: the Bible.
[2]: pious scholars.
[3]: low-tech experiments.
Consensus checking is of course also an interesting problem, albeit a pretty different one.
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#49"open source" is not the right term and also is not a verb.
"transparency" is the word you are looking for. It's more general and predates "open source" by far.
Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking
#50What problem does this solve that existing reputation systems don't? When I read a New Yorker article, for example, part of what my subscription is paying for is considerable skilled labor by a group of in-house fact checkers. How does moving this work to an outside free platform improve the situation?
Moreover, how do you replicate work like calling sources to verify statements before publication?
I wrote a short piece for Wired once and had to go back and forth with their fact checker on the most picayune details. In an article about balancing online work and travel I had mentioned in passing searching under a hotel bed for an outlet, and she wanted to know what hotel it was, what country it was in, when I stayed there, etc. The process was exhaustive and not something I would go through with a bunch of Internet randos. It was also done before publication and involved a fairly high level of trust.