"Fact-check" is a bullshit term? You don't say!

The New York Post thinks it is revealing something by noting that “fact-check” is just a way for partisan operatives to pretend they are neutral.

Of course “fact-check” is meta-propaganda. It is a sham of epic proportions. Anyone who uses the term “fact-check” is not to be trusted.


Because there is no empirical methods to it. It is no different in methods than regular journalism, which itself has no empirical methods.

It is like using a sniff-test to determine if water is polluted. It is not an actual way of accurately determining if water is contaminated — and having two people sniffing the water is no better than one.

It’s bullshit.

“Fact-check” is a term of pure doublespeak. There are no standards, and has no value whatsoever…