구조 잡기 · Why are corrections never as loud as the claim?

질문

Why are corrections never as loud as the claim?

한쪽이 다른 쪽에 크게 영향을 줍니까? 던진 표의 4분의 3으로 정합니다.

게스트로 보는 중. 참여하려면 닉네임을 입력하세요.

질문은 그룹별로 나뉘어, 내 그룹이 받은 질문만 나옵니다. 전체 180개가 다 나오지는 않습니다.

이유

수백 개의 쌍을 혼자 답할 수는 없습니다. 각 쌍은 한 그룹에 갑니다. 의견이 갈린 쌍은 다른 그룹에 넘어가므로, 다른 곳에서 시작한 쌍이 나중에 내 목록에 나올 수 있습니다. 확정된 수에는 모든 그룹의 작업이 들어가므로, 내 목록이 줄어드는 것보다 빨리 늘어납니다.

확정 176 / 180 내가 답할 질문 0개

지난 집계: 결정 176 · 그룹 간 패널로 넘김 2 · 이견 있음 0 · 최소 인원 미달 2 — 패널마다 던진 표가 최소 max(2, 패널의 75%) 필요합니다. 가장 작은 패널의 멤버는 15명입니다.

닫기 ✕

We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how → 영향을 주나? → Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported

아직 아무 말도 없습니다.

끝난 단계입니다. 쌍과 투표 기록은 위에 있습니다.논리 확인 ↗

Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	미결 넘김	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	미결 넘김	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	미결	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	미결	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✓ 예	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✓ 예	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✓ 예	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✓ 예	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✓ 예	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✓ 예	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✓ 예	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✓ 예	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✓ 예	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✓ 예	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✓ 예	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✓ 예	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✓ 예	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✓ 예	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	The metric is claims processed	✓ 예	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✓ 예	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✓ 예	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✓ 예	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✓ 예	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✓ 추론됨	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✓ 추론됨	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	The metric is claims processed	✓ 추론됨	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✓ 추론됨	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We cover the row about the change, never the change	→	Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	→	The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	We cover the row about the change, never the change	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'	→	Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	The metric is claims processed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	The metric is claims processed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	The metric is claims processed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	The metric is claims processed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	The metric is claims processed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	The metric is claims processed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	The metric is claims processed	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
By the time we could confirm it, it was old	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them	→	By the time we could confirm it, it was old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The metric is claims processed	→	We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ 아니요	보는 중 ↑ · 닫기 ✕
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ 아니요	논의하기
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field	→	Editors ask whether anyone else has run it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how	→	Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim	✗ 아니요	논의하기