The leftists made their position on social media’s relationship with free speech obvious when they erupted against Elon Musk’s purchase agreement for Twitter. Now Facebook is taking it a step further by “fact-checking” statements on the U.S. and recession.
Dr. Phillip Magness is the research and education director for the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian think tank. He revealed late last week that the social media platform used “independent fact-checkers” to review a July 24 post on recession.
The post was a screenshot of a White House statement on the case against the nation being in a recession.
His take on the statement was deemed “partly false.”
In other words, these “fact-checkers” are carrying the water for the Biden White House and attempting to counter what virtually everyone knows.
So, the arbiter of truth declared the economist’s statement that clarified the definition of recession as somewhat untrue. Facebook also warned that repeat offenders may have posts moved lower in the news feed to where others are less likely to see them.
Magness tweeted afterwards that “we live in an Orwellian hell-scape.” He added that the fact-checking industry is now nothing more than a partisan body to tilt political disputes towards the left.
At issue was the Biden administration’s furious attempts to redefine the concept of a recession. That traditionally had been two consecutive fiscal quarters in which the U.S. economy contracts. What some call negative growth.
That exact thing happened in both the first and second quarters this year, meaning a recession is either here or looming large over the economy. But the Biden White House has twisted the English language into a verbal pretzel trying to avoid carrying that tag into the November midterms.
Who is doing the “fact-checking?” Politifact is the third-party firm used by Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram. As Magness notes, Politifact had previously used the same traditional definition to either prop up Democratic claims or tear down Republican ones.
Whatever happened to the “court of public opinion?” Put different viewpoints out there and let the people decide which carries truth and which should be discarded. This isn’t even “hate speech” being labeled, merely economics.