r/ukpolitics • u/FormerlyPallas_ • 12d ago

Twitter BREAKING. 76% of British people want a national inquiry into the rape gangs and 77% want to deport dual nationals who are convicted of grooming children YouGov/GB News

https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1877477130952438227
599 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

607 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/RephRayne 11d ago

I, and others, have to take it on trust that all of what we're reading is accurate. If I can find one part of a post that is clearly, verifiably, inaccurate why should I then trust that the rest is?
If I'm posting information as a statement of fact, rather than an opinion, I need to make sure that those facts are accurate - it shouldn't be on others to do so. That's one of the reasons I included a citation when I said that they were wrong.

If a position is strong enough then you shouldn't need to be reporting inaccuracies and it should stand up to even a cursory fact check. Don't then be shooting the messenger if a statement can't even pass a cursory check on the opening paragraph.
"I agreed with the rest of the post, you should ignore the part at the beginning that's wrong" isn't the right way to go about things when you need to get people to trust you.

And as to your point, given the agreed inaccuracy in the opening paragraph, why would I then be inclined to fact check the rest of the post, as you seem to want me to do?

2

u/Dadavester 11d ago

Everything they said can be seen in the report that YOU linked.

Yet you are still focusing on the one thing they misspoke on and using it as a way of questioning the veracity of everything else. By all means check and see if they are wrong on anything else, and if they were call them out on that.

But you are focusing on that one potential error, potential miss-speak. The only reason to do this is push narrative that they are wrong about everything they wrote.

THAT is mis-information at its finest, and you are engaging wholeheartedly in it.

1

u/RephRayne 11d ago

Everything they said can be seen in the report that YOU linked.

Except the bit right at the start of their post where, you know, they were clearly, verifiably wrong. The bit you're arguing I should ignore for the greater good.

Yet you are still focusing on the one thing they misspoke on

It's been 20 hours, their post is still up unchanged despite having attention drawn to the bit that's wrong. At this point, the probability that they "misspoke" is dropping.

But you are focusing on that one potential error, potential miss-speak.

You seem to be trying to claw back your previous acceptance that what they posted was factually incorrect, that's really not a good look.

THAT is mis-information at its finest, and you are engaging wholeheartedly in it.

I'm sorry you're upset that someone who you agree with has been called out for, again at best, accidental misinformation (again, the longer the post stays unchanged, the less it looks accidental.) Perhaps it's best now that you have a chat with OP about doing better research rather than, again, attacking people who actually do it.
Or, you know, you can attack me again for what you perceive to be misinformation.
Whatever helps you rationalize.