The article critiques the transformation of journalistic “fact-checking” from a rigorous, impartial process into a politicized and subjective practice. Modern political fact-checkers, it argues, often act as quasi-judges, offering opinions disguised as authoritative truth while blurring the line between news and censorship. This shift, exacerbated by the internet and platforms like Meta, has undermined traditional media’s impartiality and credibility. Meta’s now-ended partnership with fact-checkers to suppress content highlighted their financial dependence on corporate censorship, exposing a compromised system that strayed from the ideals of free expression and journalistic independence.
For more details click the link for the full article.