(12-06-2020, 01:53 PM)jj82284 Wrote:

(12-06-2020, 12:54 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: So I suppose if you were ever asked to serve on a jury, you'd tell the judge that you can't serve because, while you're willing to listen to the prosecutor, you won't listen to the defense attorney because he is obviously biased in favor of his client.  Right?

A defense attorney is an advocate.  A "FACT CHECKER" is supposed to be a neutral arbiter.

Anyone know how to say checkmate in french?

A fact checker is not supposed to be neutral.  A fact checker is supposed to be objective.  I'm sure I don't need to explain the difference to you.  

A fact checker says, "What facts can we determine about this?"  And then, "Based on what we have found out, what (in our opinion) is the truth?"  

In this case, an edited film was presented, and charges were made, so the fact checkers did what anyone ought to do before they draw an opinion, and that is, interview the people in the film and anyone else who knows anything about it.  Based on the explanations they received from a variety of knowledgeable sources, the fact checkers came to a conclusion.

---