You may be aligned with the alleged or real partisanship of Politifact, so to you there's no problem here. But team Harris and Buttigieg lost the election.
Hence these consequences (from Wikipedia):
In January 2025, Mark Zuckerberg announced an end to Meta's eight-year partnership with PolitiFact, claiming that "fact checkers have just been too politically biased."[62][63
Most everything is "considered biased" by some people. In this case, Zuckerberg and the Bain employee who authored that report are indeed people -- 2 out of billions.
Consider an alternative framing, "fact checkers like Politifact are precisely what are considered UNbiased". It is at least as true (because at least 2 people consider it to be so).
Given that framing alternative to yours: what, if anything, should we do anything about the situation?
How do you think framing, rather than substance, affects that discussion?
Yeah it’s just the seat belt fallacy: seatbelts are useless because people still die in car crashes.
Somehow our whole society has fallen for the “unless you can point to a perfect saint who has never done any wrong, we might as well be led by active criminals” pitch. It’s so nihilistic.
> In January 2025, Mark Zuckerberg announced an end to Meta's eight-year partnership with PolitiFact, claiming that "fact checkers have just been too politically biased."[62][63
No relationship with the fact that Trump became president again in Jan 2025 with Zuckerberg giving money to his inauguration, obviously.
The "falsiness distribution" by itself is not capable of answering this kind of question. Imagine a politician who speaks just one statement, a "pants on fire" lie. They immediately reach the top liar spot.
The distribution also leaves out the significance and the reach of the statements.
Your statement is about as meaningful as the "fastest growing <whatever>" trick. E.g. growing from 0->1 user is infinite growth, so wins fastest growing immediately.
OP here -- thanks for your reply!
You're exactly right! I included the NYT/PolitiFact graph at the top as an example of that problem.
In the second half of the post, I propose what I think could work a little better (sampling comparable speeches and fact-checking the entire text).
https://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/items/8f9a6f3b-efd7-46f3-b4be...
You may be aligned with the alleged or real partisanship of Politifact, so to you there's no problem here. But team Harris and Buttigieg lost the election.
Hence these consequences (from Wikipedia):
In January 2025, Mark Zuckerberg announced an end to Meta's eight-year partnership with PolitiFact, claiming that "fact checkers have just been too politically biased."[62][63