No, Fact Checking articles will be pushed up. People here are reading this wrongly. The articles aren't marked as checked, but as themselves being fact checks (of the overall story).
Fact-checking is good, but it takes time and it's not always worth the trouble. I'd rather see someone use an honest qualifier than either claim certainty they don't have, or not post at all.
The linked page explains that fact checks aren't guaranteed to be displayed, but use an algorithm similar to page rank to choose which if any checks should be shown.
Fact checking doesn't automatically mean people will believe the fact checker over the top link anyways. Exposing people to disagreement to the issue from the start may be important because once people form a belief, they're much more likely to hold that believe despite contradictory evidence.
Retroactive fact checking is an interesting question. Should social media fact check content that was shown to be false after it was posted? I'd say yes.
Fact checking is probably best done by a third party of the user's choosing. It's rare that a statement cannot be reasonbly argued from multiple angles. We simply have to pick the sources we trust and picking them for us is probably not the best solution.
I understand the desire to prevent fake stories, but probably much better to tie credibility to individuals so there's more at stake for them personally.
reply