Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

sourcedfact.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 303 posts

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#201

Post by metasj »

sanbor wrote: post #66
rootusrootus wrote: post #59

Great project, but this seems like a classic example of a programmer naively assuming a technical solution can solve a social problem.

But it might be worth a try. Wikipedia does pretty well imho but if someone would told me the idea I would never thought that it would work.

Wikipedia, for a few high-profile current events each week, serves a function similar to the one proposed for sourcedfact; and it regularly results in deeper + more contextualized coverage than even the best outlets. However, WP's commitment to being a tertiary source means that _some_ secondary source has to properly interpret the primary sources, before that interpretation can be included.

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#202

Post by 1000units »

rootusrootus wrote: post #195
1000units wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You assume the drummer was trying to go somewhere such that someone could block his path. But he was exactly where he wanted, in this kid's face trying to provoke him. And the kid just smirked, earning great hatred and hostility from people who don't think there's any place for a smile in this cold, brutal world.

I assume the kid wanted the confrontation just as much, hence the smirk and refusal to make a hole for the guy to walk through. Even if it is exactly what the old man wanted, the kid is not blameless.

Again, you're assuming the kid had the option of yielding so that the drummer could "walk through." Watch the original video that includes the surrounding events.

The kid did have an option to yield: getting on his knees and begging for forgiveness for the crime of appearing at an anti-abortion demonstration as a white Catholic male. Then the drummer (who is a 'professional protestor', by the way) would have had a more dramatic story to sell.

Instead, he smirked.

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#203

Post by anigbrowl »

beat wrote: post #109

Awkward question here... can anyone cite an example of a major-media news story that was actually factually wrong in a way that "open source fact checking" could have detected it? Just because a bunch of people believe it's a problem doesn't mean it's a problem. I find the bias, when it exists, is in the presentation, not the facts themselves. And mainstream journalism is really committed to getting the facts right.

Because arguments about facts take place all the time when people dismiss citations, so having a source that exists specifically to document claims in open fashion becomes a useful reference.

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#204

Post by anigbrowl »

ahnick wrote: post #7

IMHO reputation is important to build into the base level for a platform like this. Allowing anon registrations and commenting will eventually lead to a lot of noise and abuse of the platform for misinformation. I think some sort of verification of a person's qualifications on particular subject areas and then allowing them to only "fact check" on those qualified areas is required here to have an effective platform t…

Disagree. The point is to link assertions to publicly available primary sources like court documents or suchlike and articulate the linkage clearly.It's well designed for that.

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#205

Post by [deleted] »

1000units wrote: post #202
rootusrootus wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume the kid wanted the confrontation just as much, hence the smirk and refusal to make a hole for the guy to walk through. Even if it is exactly what the old man wanted, the kid is not blameless.

Again, you're assuming the kid had the option of yielding so that the drummer could "walk through." Watch the original video that includes the surrounding events. The kid did have an option to yield: getting on his knees and begging for forgiveness for the crime of appearing at an anti-abortion demonstration as a white Catholic male. Then the drummer (who is a 'professional protestor', by the way) would have had a mo…

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#206

Post by fundingshovel »

beat wrote: post #182
fundingshovel wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.vox.com/2019/1/19/18189668/white-students-maga-g... https://variety.com/2019/biz/news/maga-hat-wearing-teens-tau...

Firsthand quote from the VOX article... “It was getting ugly, and I was thinking: ‘I’ve got to find myself an exit out of this situation and finish my song at the Lincoln Memorial,’” Phillips told the Washington Post in a separate interview. “I started going that way, and that guy in the hat stood in my way, and we were at an impasse. He just blocked my way and wouldn’t allow me to retreat.” The article is explicit.…

The article was modified, and the sections in your quote added. I should have used the internet archive originally.

See: https://web.archive.org/web/20190120030012/https://www.vox.c...

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#207

Post by pvg »

beat wrote: post #198
Macross8299 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Can anyone cite an example of a major-media news story that was actually factually wrong in a way that "open source fact checking" could have detected it? The Supermicro """backdoor""" story of late last year, where Bloomberg alleged that the company had surreptitiously placed small microchips on nearly all their products on behalf of China without anyone noticing

Was that ever conclusively disproved? By whom? And with what evidence? That could well fall under he said she said.

That could well fall under he said she said.

That doesn't seem like a sensible standard, most reporting falls under 'our sources said vs what someone else said'. Many details of this particular story were later disputed by others, including Apple. Would a crowd-sourced fact-checking service have helped here? No, because it wasn't at all necessary. It's still a story with serious problems - it's 'the anonymous sources of the reporters' vs 'just about everybody else involved'.

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#208

Post by 1000units »

rootusrootus wrote: post #189
ajvs wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it matter what he says his intent was? He can paint whatever story he likes in interviews, but nobody would appreciate a random person going right in their face and beating a drum, especially a young kid. You can even see him flinching because of the proximity. Not sure what you're talking about "hearing that story", the video evidence is clear as day.

[deleted unpopular opinion]

META:

I recommend against deleting unpopular comments. Editing in something like "Update: I disavow!" if you've changed your mind is harmless, but in general there's a benefit to treating public statements as a sort of permanent record.

This practice exposes people to potentially underappreciated viewpoints and allows others to track the development and popularity of ideas.

I have many poorly rated comments preserved here, but on balance I think people respect my personal commitment to the truth, however I see it. In the realm of public expression, it's honesty and integrity which matter most. Everybody is wrong sometimes; it's part of the process of discovering truth.

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#209

Post by terryd »

beat wrote: post #109

Awkward question here... can anyone cite an example of a major-media news story that was actually factually wrong in a way that "open source fact checking" could have detected it? Just because a bunch of people believe it's a problem doesn't mean it's a problem. I find the bias, when it exists, is in the presentation, not the facts themselves. And mainstream journalism is really committed to getting the facts right.

> I find the bias, when it exists, is in the presentation, not the facts themselves.

You mean something like a lie by omission? That is pretty easily solved with some form of source control and public pull requests. An equivalent to git blame would be pretty helpful (cue Sinclair Broadcast Group NPC script reading). Just watch http://newsdiffs.org/ for a while, these people regularly modify stories without editor's notes. It is kind of funny that further below you discuss the embarrassing conduct of the media in their coverage of Covington Catholic... do you remember what was in the news cycle right before they breathlessly pounced on a non-story? The media was getting embarrassed by a very rare direct denial from the DoJ in relation to their latest reporting on the Trump collusion conspiracy theory.

I agree with your broader point though: this won't improve the media. They're not even pretending to be unbiased and have no shame in telling laughably obvious lies about the most ridiculous thing - like koi ponds. Their motivation is clear: short sighted servicing of those needing confirmation bias conforming stories. This isn't a scheme hatched in a smoke filled back room, it is just a very foolish business plan.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/358983-media-shows-w...

Re: Show HN: I made a platform for journalists to “open source” their fact checking

#210

Post by ahnick »

anigbrowl wrote: post #204
ahnick wrote: post #7

IMHO reputation is important to build into the base level for a platform like this. Allowing anon registrations and commenting will eventually lead to a lot of noise and abuse of the platform for misinformation. I think some sort of verification of a person's qualifications on particular subject areas and then allowing them to only "fact check" on those qualified areas is required here to have an effective platform t…

Disagree. The point is to link assertions to publicly available primary sources like court documents or suchlike and articulate the linkage clearly.It's well designed for that.

Because anon users won't link to "primary sources", which are really nothing of the sort? Because "primary sources" are always correct and trustworthy and never disagree?
Post reply on HN