True Causes
EN
Bahasa IndonesiaDanskDeutschEnglishEspañolFrançaisItalianoNederlandsNorskPolskiPortuguêsSrpski (latinica)SvenskaTiếng ViệtTürkçeΕλληνικάРусскийСрпски (ћирилица)Українська中文日本語한국어
← lobby
7/7 · Actions · viewing Structure
30 people · 34 ideas
walkthrough · not counted
obstacles · anyone with the link · listed publicly · federation on
stewarded by its steward (sealed)
30 people · 34 ideas · 2 groups · 3 rooms federated
Passport → · Logic → · record
↗ share this map
On another site, as a live map:
As a picture: https://truecauses.org/d/c29b4cd/map.svg
As data: every judged pair in this room (CSV). Each claim has its own address, /c/c29b4cd/<card>, listed under the map.
Credit when you publish: Causal map: True Causes, https://truecauses.org/d/c29b4cd
THE QUESTION

Why are corrections never as loud as the claim?

Does one significantly influence the other? Three quarters of the votes cast decide.

closed · back to Actions
Viewing as guest. Enter a handle to join and take part.
Questions are shared out between groups, so you get the ones your group was given — not all 180.
why
Nobody could answer several hundred pairs. Each pair goes to one group; a pair that splits is then referred to other groups, so it can appear in your list later even though it started elsewhere. The settled count includes every group's work, which is why it climbs faster than your own list shrinks.
176 / 180 settled 0 for you to answer
Last tally: 176 decided · 2 escalated to cross-group panels · 0 contested · 2 below quorum — panels need at least max(2, 75% of panel) votes cast; your smallest panel has 15 members.
close ✕
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical → influences? → We label the claim and cannot label the confidence
Nothing said yet.
Completed phase — the record of pairs and votes stands above.Check the logic ↗
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumedopen escalateddiscuss
The metric is claims processed→Editors ask whether anyone else has run itopen escalateddiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every fieldopendiscuss
The metric is claims processed→We label the claim and cannot label the confidenceopendiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→We cover the row about the change, never the change✓ yesdiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✓ yesdiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✓ yesdiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✓ yesdiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✓ yesdiscuss
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✓ yesdiscuss
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✓ yesdiscuss
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✓ yesdiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✓ yesdiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✓ yesdiscuss
The metric is claims processed→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✓ yesdiscuss
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✓ yesdiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✓ yesdiscuss
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✓ yesdiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→The metric is claims processed✓ yesdiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✓ yesdiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✓ yesdiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✓ yesdiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✓ yesdiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✓ inferreddiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✓ inferreddiscuss
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→The metric is claims processed✓ inferreddiscuss
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✓ inferreddiscuss
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✗ nodiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric✗ nodiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✗ nodiscuss
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✗ nodiscuss
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuss
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✗ nodiscuss
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✗ nodiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✗ nodiscuss
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✗ nodiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric✗ nodiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
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'✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✗ nodiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
We cover the row about the change, never the change→Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed✗ nodiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuss
Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Nobody measures whether our corrections reach the people who saw the claim✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→We cover the row about the change, never the change✗ nodiscuss
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Checking the powerful is slower per claim, so it loses on the metric✗ nodiscuss
Being first is rewarded and being right is assumed→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
The quiet revision is not an event, so it is not news→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuss
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
There is no news hook for 'the advice changed and nobody said'→Checking an institution takes weeks and checking a tweet takes an hour✗ nodiscuss
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→The metric is claims processed✗ nodiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→The metric is claims processed✗ nodiscuss
The metric is claims processed→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
The metric is claims processed→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→The metric is claims processed✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✗ nodiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
The metric is claims processed→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
The metric is claims processed→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→The metric is claims processed✗ nodiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✗ nodiscuss
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✗ nodiscuss
Editors ask whether anyone else has run it→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→The metric is claims processed✗ nodiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✗ nodiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→The metric is claims processed✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them✗ nodiscuss
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
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✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→The metric is claims processed✗ nodiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field✗ nodiscuss
The metric is claims processed→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✗ nodiscuss
By the time we could confirm it, it was old→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✗ noin focus ↑ · close ✕
We are asked to check claims, not the guidance that generated them→By the time we could confirm it, it was old✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical✗ nodiscuss
Our funding is project-based and follows whatever is topical→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✗ nodiscuss
The metric is claims processed→We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how✗ nodiscuss
Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→We label the claim and cannot label the confidence✗ nodiscuss
We label the claim and cannot label the confidence→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuss
A newsroom cannot hold a specialist for every field→Editors ask whether anyone else has run it✗ nodiscuss
We say we are independent and the audience is right to ask how→Nobody is checking the structure that produced the claim✗ nodiscuss