Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by takeda 2073 days ago
The problem here that this "bombshell" article did not provide enough information to do any kind of verification.

The main evidence is a PDF file of a print of an e-mail (without even providing a header information).

- we don't know if it's Hunter's laptop as claimed (kind of odd that somebody bothers with laptop repair (let's be honest, a lot people here probably buy a new one) and then leaves it there?

- we don't know if this is a real e-mail (headers could be used to prove that)

- we don't know that the sender e-mail is an e-mail connected to the person Hunter is accused talking to (the ".ukraine" in e-mail is very odd, who would put their country in an e-mail address, it's long and is not like he has a super common name)

- we don't know Hunter responded to it (since they have his laptop, you would think they would have his e-mails as well)

- we don't know the meeting actually happened

- this story is obviously an October surprise (the time is picked exactly to impact voting, there's also not enough time to prove it is false)

1 comments

I agree with all of your points but why is it Twitter or Facebook's responsibility to check all of those things for every article posted to their platform? Why is the onus not on you as the reader to do your own fact checking?
Because the timing of this piece (if you look at the PDF was created a year ago, but published just in middle of October). It is clear that it is timed to affect election results.

They are not responsible, to check all things. But it's mostly ethics and self preservation. I don't think anyone will deny that they actually have real impact now (even greater than MSM now) and I believe if Democrats win, there will be some laws passed adding some checks. I also believe trump with executive order about section 230 also probably contributed.