h a l f b a k e r y
We don't have enough art & classy shit around here.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
Public Fact Checking
Public fact checking services for public debates, press releases, interviews etc
For example in the recent presidential debates, imagine if as a candidated claimed they did not own part of a logging company, or did not say something, that their facts where checked, and the results made publically availble, either online, or on television services such as Teletext (or whatever it
is called in the US) or with the new digital interactive services. Clips of recordings of relevant interviews in which somebody actually did say something could be shown as proof they are lying, and so on. As long as the fact checking is accurate, and does it best to estimate its own accuracy, and makes availible to the viewers the evidence they use to come to a conclusion on whether or not they are lying. Of course the possibility for subjectivity is immense so in such circumstances phrases and sentences should be linked with video clips, and user opinions can be displayed stating whether or not the evidence shows they are lying or not. This sort of system would require pretty significant man power, but not insurmountable, and the systems for delivering the content already exist in one form or another. Interactive television services and backchannel information such as Teletext being the most easily accessible formats, but a much more indepth analysis could easily be provided over the internet. Hell you could even provide live audio commentary over the phone for truly enormous market penetration. The chances of a network actually implementing something like this are pretty minimal probably, but a website running a live ripped feed of the debate, or even just a plain website with semi-live transcripts could do it pretty well given enough volunteers.
Kind of like this?
[yabba do yabba dabba, Oct 26 2004]
Not quite what you describe, but in the same ballpark. [krelnik, Oct 27 2004]
Coming soon to a network near you
until the government refuses to allow networks that use it into conference rooms [Voice, Jan 31 2013]
||factcheck.org fails is various ways in my opinion. principly its US focussed, not international and seperated by country, and secondly because they are a single organisation and dont have a method of showing users opinion of their facts outside of letting people link to them and harass them alot. What im really after is LIVE fact checking. Or at least as near to it as possible. Which I suppose really means television based.
||In days of yore, something called "the press" actually served this purpose. Dunno what happened.
||[krelnik], sadly, there's little reason to trust the press anymore, from either side of the spectrum