The International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) is an organization that until recently you may have never heard of, but is now poised to make a powerful influence on your life. Why? The multi-billion dollar corporation and CIA data mining operation, Facebook, has decided to enlist the help of the International Fact-Checking Network in its quest to eliminate “fake news” (i.e. enact censorship through the backdoor).
Those aware of the current psychological operations will know that the entire Russian propaganda and fake news themes are stealthy ways for the establishment to stifle dissent. They are whipping the public into a frenzy about purported Russian hacking and Russian interference without a shred of credible evidence, all the while scaring people into thinking they need some “independent” arbiter (outside of themselves) to decipher and decide what is real and what is fake. It’s the ultimate perception grab; they want you to hand over your power and let your perception be dictated by them.
Now, Facebook has announced it will be using the International Fact-Checking Network and other 3rd party fact-checking organizations to weed out all the fake news. Is the International Fact-Checking Network poised to become some kind of Ministry of Truth as Orwell wrote about? Who funds the organization and how does its check its facts?
Guess Who Funds the International Fact-Checking Network?
The IFCN openly states that it is hosted by the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, and that:
… Poynter’s IFCN has received funding from the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation, the Duke Reporters’ Lab, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, the National Endowment for Democracy, the Omidyar Network, the Open Society Foundations and the Park Foundation.
The ICFN’s Code of 5 Principles
The International Fact-Checking Network has come up with a code of 5 principles by which it operates. Facebook said it will only work with 3rd party fact-checkers that are signatories to this code of principles, and that once one of these organizations decides that a particular story is fake, it will be flagged as disputed and “there will be a link to the corresponding article explaining why. Stories that have been disputed may also appear lower in News Feed.” Here are the 5 principles:
- A COMMITMENT TO NONPARTISANSHIP AND FAIRNESS
We fact-check claims using the same standard for every fact check. We do not concentrate our fact-checking on any one side. We follow the same process for every fact check and let the evidence dictate our conclusions. We do not advocate or take policy positions on the issues we fact-check.
- A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF SOURCES
We want our readers to be able to verify our findings themselves. We provide all sources in enough detail that readers can replicate our work, except in cases where a source’s personal security could be compromised. In such cases, we provide as much detail as possible.
- A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF FUNDING & ORGANIZATION
We are transparent about our funding sources. If we accept funding from other organizations, we ensure that funders have no influence over the conclusions we reach in our reports. We detail the professional background of all key figures in our organization and explain our organizational structure and legal status. We clearly indicate a way for readers to communicate with us.
- A COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY OF METHODOLOGY
We explain the methodology we use to select, research, write, edit, publish and correct our fact checks. We encourage readers to send us claims to fact-check and are transparent on why and how we fact-check.
- A COMMITMENT TO OPEN AND HONEST CORRECTIONS
We publish our corrections policy and follow it scrupulously. We correct clearly and transparently in line with our corrections policy, seeking so far as possible to ensure that readers see the corrected version.
Facebook has made it a prerequisite to be a signatory on this code of principles to become a Facebook fact-checker. However, on the very same page below the code of principles, there is a list of organizations that have already joined. They include ABC News and The Washington Post Fact Checker – 2 MSM outlets. The Washington Post was the paper that started all the nonsense about Russian propaganda with its own fake news report based on the dodgy research of PropOrNot (a report it later retracted)! Politifact and Snopes are also on the list, and although they are not MSM, their reputations are already quite tarnished due to their past shoddy fact-checking.
How Can Fact-Checkers, No Matter How Well Intentioned, Ever Be the Arbiters of Truth?
Does the group of NWO funders behind Poynter give you the impression that the International Fact-Checking Network will be independent? Moreover, even if they were granted some kind of “editorial independence” by their funders, would they have the desire and ability to become arbiters of truth on massive and complex subjects like GMOs, the New World Order, geoengineering, worldwide pedophilia rings, conspiracy and Satanism? How are they going to “fact-check” statements like “GMOs are not dangerous to human health,” “vaccines are safe and effective,” “there is no worldwide Satanic pedophilia ring,” “chemtrails do not exist,” “Morgellons disease does not exist,” “black military operations oversee mind control programs on the public” and “an interconnected web of hybrid bloodlines rules the world from behind the scenes?” Since many current topics lead back to fundamental issues like these, how are they possibly going to shed any light on these vast topics?
How can anyone expect them to be experts in these fields? How are they going to be able to do anything other than parrot the standard narrative on these topics, which they will get from some form of the MSM or “mainstream science” – the very same sources which advocate toxic-laden vaccines and synthetic pharmaceutical drugs as good for your health? How are they are possibly going to have the scope, breadth and depth of vision and perception that comes from studying these topics in depth for decades as many in the Alternative Media have?
It’s Not About Left vs. Right; It’s About Free Speech vs. Censorship
Some commentators and journalists are making this issue into a left vs. right affair, claiming that the fact-checkers are left, liberal or progressive in their political leanings. While it’s true that Soros funds leftist movements, this whole issue is not really about left vs. right. It’s about free speech vs. censorship. The fact-checkers will of course have all sorts of biases in their viewpoints, which is why all opinions need to be fully aired so the truth can rise to the surface.
Imagine if everyone looked at every Internet story – from the MSM and the Alternative Media alike – and asked with a critical eye: where’s your evidence and what are your sources? There would be no need for fact-checkers, because every reader would become a fact-checker. It would also destroy government lies right from the start (“the Russians are hacking us” and “the Zika virus will kill you”), because they would never get a chance to take off.
The only way out of this is education. The only way people can know the truth is to read widely, inform themselves about the issues, discuss it over and over, get new perspectives, test things out in their own experience and make up their own mind. Blocking news stories and alternative perspectives will only hamper this (but then, censorship is the whole point of this exercise). Yes, hoax stories are annoying and clickbait headlines are irritating, but at some point, you have to trust that readers will begin to see through that crap and consciously choose which sites to read and which to shun. If a site keeps putting out lies and clickbait, at a certain point it will gain a negative reputation and get ostracized.
Collectively, we have to grow up and not expect or call for governments and other organizations like the International Fact-Checking Network to do our fact-checking for us. We have to do it ourselves. It is part of our spiritual journey to be able to mature to the point where we can discern truth from lies. When enough of us can do that, the world will know peace, for as Julian Assange says, if lies are used to start war, then truth can be used to start peace.
Want the latest commentary and analysis on Conspiracy, Geopolitics, Natural Health, Sovereignty, Consciousness and more? Sign up for free blog updates!
Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles, where this article first appeared, and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.
Image Credit/ Still from the 1956 film version of Orwell’s 1984. Photo by Rex Features