Breaking News

Is the UK Government using FullFact.org to do its dirty work?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In its usual delightfully mischievous fashion Guido Fawkes recently highlighted FullFact slamming the Labour Party for telling lies.  However, is there more to this story? Does FullFact’s latest “fact-check” of Labour’s local election campaign tell us something about FullFact’s ambitions? Has it crossed a line?

FullFact Slams Labour for Continuing to Push False Cost of Living Sums

By Guido Fawkes

Despite an ongoing holier-than-thou campaign about truth in politics, this morning [22 April] Labour has been slammed by fact-checkers for continuing to publish statistics claiming the average household will be “£2,620 worse off” as a result of the “cost of living crisis”. This calculation is, in fact, 274% off the real figure…

On 8 April, FullFact first called out this statistic, labelling it as false as it’s “based on unreliable assumptions, and it excludes wages and benefits, which are rising. Official estimates suggest that the average household will be roughly £700 worse off in 2022/23.” Despite FullFact contacting Sir Keir’s office about the claim at the time, they received no response, and the party has refused to share full details of how its estimates were calculated.

On Thursday the website’s had to redouble its fact-checking efforts as it emerges not only is the party unable – or refusing – to justify the sums, Labour HQ is actively selling the leaflet to local election campaigns with the figure featuring prominently. The leaflets have also been slammed by some on the left of the party for having “final demand” stamped on the envelope…

Shadow Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson was censured for having repeated the claim on Facebook since FullFact previously called the party out, and they note the party has pushed out at least four active Facebook adverts since they were contacted about the inaccuracy. 

At this time Guido turns to the words of the Right Honourable leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition spoken in the Commons just yesterday [21 April]: “honesty, integrity and telling the truth matter in our politics. That is not a principle that I or the Labour party have a special claim to. It is a British principle.”


The Exposé reports the facts the mainstream refuse to. Let’s not lose touch, subscribe today to receive the latest news from The Exposé in your inbox…

Follow The Exposé on Telegram
Join The Exposé’s Telegram Discussion Group


FullFact Has Crossed the Line

“One of the Facebook adverts says: ‘Under the Conservatives families are £2,620 worse off’. This is not correct, as Full Fact has explained in detail before … We have asked Labour to correct the record on these claims, but at the time of writing it has not done so,” FullFact wrote.

FullFact can write whatever “fact-checking” blogs they choose including highlighting another lie by another politician. In a liberal democracy, underpinned by freedom of speech, we all can.  But who are they to instruct a political party to “correct” their campaign materials?  Who appointed them as election watchdog?

The name “FullFact” is Newspeak as is the so-called “fact-check” service it purports to provide.  As we wrote in a previous article, FullFact is essentially a blog site headed by Conservative Party donor Michael Samuel, heavily funded by tech giants with vested interests, and staffed mainly by ex-civil servants and other government agencies such as the Behavioural Insights Team.

It’s important to note FullFact has ambitions to globalise its “fact-checking” as it is developing “world-leading technology and new research to spot repeated claims, and find out how bad information can be tackled at a global scale.”

There are already worrying signs FullFact has become the official propaganda arm of the UK government and globalist censorship organisations. Now, it seems, FullFact are trying to take it a step further, and not for the first time, by attempting to have authority over political parties, to direct their behaviour. Why? Under whose authority?

It’s time to shut FullFact down before they turn in George Orwell’s Ministry of Truth both within the UK and beyond.

Is the UK Government using FullFact.org to do its dirty work?
Share this page to Telegram

Categories: Breaking News, Latest News

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Peter
Peter
29 days ago

Just another corrupt NGO that needs closing down, and its leaders arrested and investigated for corruption.

janice
janice
Reply to  Peter
29 days ago

Just another person that thinks their corrupt owners will arrest themselves and lock themselves up for being corrupt.

Bob - Enough
Bob - Enough
Reply to  Peter
29 days ago

Much bigger than that in my view, have a look at the comment I wrote above you and I only touched the surface.

gomon
gomon
Reply to  Peter
28 days ago

FullFact first called out this statistic, labelling it as false as it’s “based on unreliable assumptions, and it excludes wages and benefits, which are rising. Official estimates suggest that the average household will be roughly £700 worse off in 2022/23.” Despite FullFact contacting Sir Keir’s office about the claim at the time, they received no response, and the party has refused to share full details of how its estimates were calculated.

John Coutts
John Coutts
29 days ago

Should we just believe what fact checkers say? No, we should not, for as a recent court case showed, so-called “fact checks” are no more than opinions, which may not actually be true.

In 2020, journalist John Stossel brought a lawsuit against Facebook when they “fact checked” a video he made where he interviewed experts on the subject of climate change, claiming it was false news.

Stossel sued for defamation, and in court, Facebook admitted that their claim of false news was nothing more than “statements of opinion,” and not factual assertions.

In their legal brief, Facebook’s lawyers argued that fact checks are protected under the First Amendment because they are opinions, and not assertions of facts.

It can be argued, therefore, that what is the case for Facebook, applies to all “fact checkers.” They are, of course, entitled to their opinions, but their opinions should never be elevated to a false status of authority and be confused with actual facts.

Peter Westwood
Peter Westwood
29 days ago

What is at stake is the future of something I call the “World Mind”. As a species we developed communications enabling us to share and arrive at a consensus. We were getting to the point where the fake money creators and the ancient “Royals” were being exposed as an inhuman presence (inhuman in that they considered mass murder as ordinary business, assassination as a tool, the death of innocents and of innocence as a desirable end: “Human” beings exclude these monstrous crimes en masse.) Thus the creatures that rule our world understood that they needed to utterly control the emerging World Mind of humanity and have used our internet and the expertise of bought and corrupted human beings and their wilfully ignorant lackeys to take such control. The events staged are a means to this end. If once humanity as a species understood how all hierarchies of power and authority everywhere depended upon the supply of fake money and the ancient and unwarranted positions of power of the descendants of genocidal Emperors and Kings then WE could decide to run our world differently.
Everything that is happening is a facet of this world war against the emergence of the World Mind. THEY understand what WE might become capable of and wish to kill that unborn child, the destiny of our species.

janice
janice
Reply to  Peter Westwood
29 days ago

You are a prat. It’s not “your species”. Your idea of “society” is not one I want any part of. And you didn’t “develop communications enabling us to share and arrive at a consensus”. What consensus? Are you one of these people who wants to be hooked up to a computer? Personally, I want no part of your “species” in any way, least of all as a part of some global crapshoot where you’re telling me (yet again) what to do and how to think.

“Everything that is happening is a facet of this world war against the emergence of the World Mind. THEY understand what WE might become capable of and wish to kill that unborn child, the destiny of our species.”

If there were such a child, I’d kill it, as would anyone who doesn’t want to be controlled by the vermin that is “mankind”.

scarlet
scarlet
Reply to  janice
29 days ago

It’s funny how all the evil in the world comes from man, yet man really doesn’t like it when you point it out to him.

Paul Watson
Paul Watson
29 days ago

Fact checkers…an oxymoron on steroids.

Bob - Enough
Bob - Enough
29 days ago

You may like to look at who funds “FullFact”; they even tell us = https://fullfact.org/about/funding/

Anyone notice the “Vaccine Grant Program” ?? = https://www.poynter.org/vaccine-grant-program/

Then open those 2 links = https://ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org/signatories

“Led by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) at the Poynter Institute, the #CoronaVirusFacts unites more than 100 fact checkers around the world in publishing, sharing, and translating facts surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. The Alliance was launched in January 2020 when the spread of the virus was restricted to China but was already causing rampant misinformation globally. The World Health Organization classifies this as an infodemic — and the Alliance is on the front lines in the fight against it.”

scarlet
scarlet
29 days ago

The uk “government” are c*nts to a man. And the only way out is to kill every last one of them.

Last edited 29 days ago by scarlet