If you’re someone who uses Facebook then you’re well aware of the fact-checkers that riddle the platform.

I would say that it’s probably very likely that you’ve even posted some content before only to have it slapped with a label that marked it as misinformation or not accurate or something along those lines, especially if it was something that’s related to conservative values or President Trump.

We know who these fact-checkers are we know that they’re liberals even though Facebook may claim that they are some sort of neutral third party that’s not true at all. In fact, these fact checks are nothing more than liberal opinions and now Facebook even admits that in a recent court filing.

In an ongoing court battle with John Stossel, who is suing Facebook/Meta for defamation after they decided to “fact check” Stossel’s videos, the company admitted that they’re not actually fact-checking at all.

Facebook’s court filing states:

Beyond this threshold Section 230 problem, the complaint also fails to state a claim for defamation. For one, Stossel fails to plead facts establishing that Meta acted with actual malice— which, as a public figure, he must. For another, Stossel’s claims focus on the fact-check articles written by Climate Feedback, not the labels affixed through the Facebook platform. The labels themselves are neither false nor defamatory; to the contrary, they constitute protected opinion. And even if Stossel could attribute Climate Feedback’s separate webpages to Meta, the challenged statements on those pages are likewise neither false nor defamatory. Any of these failures would doom Stossel’s complaint, but the combination makes any amendment futile.

So once again we have this situation where we have to ask ourselves and ask them who is to be the arbiter of truth in matters such as these? Well apparently Facebook AKA Meta is the ultimate arbiter of truth in this space. They get to separate fact from fiction or at least what they want you to believe is fact and what is fiction.