Strukturering · Why are corrections never as loud as the claim?

SPØRGSMÅLET

Why are corrections never as loud as the claim?

Har den ene væsentlig indflydelse på den anden? Tre fjerdedele af de afgivne stemmer afgør det.

Du ser med som gæst. Vælg et brugernavn for at komme med og deltage.

Spørgsmålene fordeles mellem grupperne, så du får dem, din gruppe fik tildelt — ikke alle 180.

hvorfor

Ingen kunne svare på flere hundrede par. Hvert par går til én gruppe; et par, der deler gruppen, sendes derefter videre til andre grupper, så det kan dukke op på din liste senere, selvom det startede et andet sted. Antallet af afgjorte tæller alle gruppers arbejde, og derfor stiger det hurtigere, end din egen liste skrumper.

176 / 180 afgjort 0 til dig at besvare

Seneste optælling: afgjort: 176 · sendt videre til tværgående paneler: 2 · omstridt: 0 · under kvorum: 2 — paneler skal have mindst max(2, 75 % af panelet) afgivne stemmer; dit mindste panel har 15 medlemmer.

luk ✕

Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric → påvirker? → We cover the row about the change, never the change

Intet sagt endnu.

Afsluttet fase — historikken over par og stemmer står ovenfor.Tjek logikken ↗

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