Facebook fact-checkers have been criticized since their inception.
Conservatives have pointed out that they are not fact-checkers but rather tools of the left.
Facebook all but just admitted that in a court filing.
Facebook admitted that their fact-checks are nothing more than “protected opinions.”
NEW – Facebook asserts "fact checks," created by third-party organizations and used to remove content or to suspend users, are nothing more than "protected opinions" in a court filing. pic.twitter.com/KBj6D9MNVO
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 10, 2021
Meta Platforms, formerly known as Facebook, has admitted in a court filing that its fact checks are merely “protected opinions.” The court filing was entered in response to a lawsuit filed by the Libertarian pundit John Stossel, who claimed that one of Facebook’s “fact checks” inserted on a video defamed him and was misleading.
Court filing: Facebook fact checks were “protected opinions”
In response, Facebook argued that the so-called “fact check” was actually an “opinion” rather than an actual check and statement of the facts. Opinions are protected from libel accusations, releasing the person or entity that made the statements from liability. On the other hand, statements labeled as fact make the person or entity making them subject to a libel lawsuit for defamation.
Whatever decision is made by the court, the filing and the lawsuit are a public relations disaster for Meta Platforms. The statement in the court filing that the so-called “fact checks” are nothing but “protected opinions” places Facebook in a precarious position.
The Palmieri Report is a Pro-America News Outlet founded by Jacob Palmieri. The Palmieri Report is dedicated to giving people the truth so that they can form their own informed political opinions. You can help us beat Big Tech by following us on GETTR , Telegram, and Rumble.