←back to thread

CDC data are disappearing

(www.theatlantic.com)
749 points doener | 2 comments | 01 Feb 25 11:52 UTC | HN request time: 0.4s | source
Show context
breadwinner ◴[01 Feb 25 20:59 UTC] No.42902252[source]▶
Data is the ultimate Fact Check. This is a President that's adamantly opposed to fact checking [1] and has even coerced Facebook to drop fact checking. Of course they don't want data on government sites that disprove their "alternate facts".

[1] https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4920827-60-minutes-tru...

replies(10): >>42902356 #>>42902413 #>>42902434 #>>42902630 #>>42902793 #>>42902978 #>>42903439 #>>42903684 #>>42904050 #>>42918244 #
SeptiumMMX ◴[01 Feb 25 21:57 UTC] No.42902793[source]▶
Well, fact-checking works if it's done impartially. So, if you want to fairly fact-check a political debate, each side should have their own team of researchers/fact-checkers being equally able to object to an argument made by the opposing party. Due process, sort of, kind of.

But I don't think I've ever seen that done actually. Usually, fact checkers are akin to Reddit moderators. Technically independent, but with one important twist. These are people that have a lot of free time and are willing to spend it doing unpaid (or underpaid) work. And that's a huge bias. Big enough to question impartiality, if you ask me.

replies(7): >>42903035 #>>42903405 #>>42903547 #>>42904979 #>>42905326 #>>42906291 #>>42908884 #
eastbound ◴[01 Feb 25 23:15 UTC] No.42903547[source]▶
The fact checkers’ own employer said that the fact checkers didn’t work because they were so heavily biased that the audience noticed it.
replies(1): >>42903807 #
hackyhacky ◴[01 Feb 25 23:46 UTC] No.42903807[source]▶
Translation: the audience is so biased that they automatically reject facts in conflict with their biases.
replies(1): >>42906902 #
1. eastbound ◴[02 Feb 25 07:40 UTC] No.42906902[source]▶
No amount of showing you the mistakes in your papers works. “Women earn 52 cents on the dollar!” Same job? “Yes” No, look here.

“But there is still this argument” — No, there isn’t, it’s been studied in that other study.

You guys just always come back and cast doubt, but it’s only this: Doubt and finally, falsehoods.

replies(1): >>42908484 #
2. hackyhacky ◴[02 Feb 25 13:24 UTC] No.42908484[source]▶
> You guys just always come back and cast doubt

If that's your attitude, maybe you're the one with the preconvieved biases.