As jointly reported by Popular Information and by Heated:

“Last year, Facebook partnered with an organization, Science Feedback, that would bring in teams of Ph.D. climate scientists to evaluate the accuracy of viral content. It was an important expansion of the company's third-party fact-checking program.” 

So far, so good. Good work Facebook.

Then, this happened:

“Now Facebook has reportedly decided to allow its staffers to overrule the climate scientists and make any climate disinformation ineligible for fact-checking by deeming it "opinion." 

Opinion?!

If I write on Facebook that jumping off the top of the Empire State Building is a “good idea” and “won’t kill you”, would it be right for Facebook to leave it up because it was only my “opinion”?

Mull on that one for a bit.

So, how did it come to this? Here is how the story begins:

“A column published in the Washington Examiner in August 2019 claimed that "climate models" were a "failure" that predicted exponentially more warming of the earth than has occurred. The piece, co-authored by notorious climate science denier Pat Michaels, was quickly shared more than 2,000 times on Facebook. 

“There was just one issue: It wasn't true.”

Science Feedback scientists, for Facebook, got to fact-check it:

“Five scientists reviewed the Washington Examiner article for Science Feedback. The scientists identified a number of problems with the piece: "false factual assertions, cherry-picking datasets that support their point, failing to account for uncertainties in those datasets, and failing to assess the performance of climate models in an objective and rigorous manner." The article was rated "false" by Science Feedback and logged in Facebook's system.” 

Again, so far, so good.

Then, this happened:

“An organization affiliated with Michaels, the CO2 Coalition, wrote Zuckerberg and complained about Science Feedback's rating. Among other things, the coalition claims that Science Feedback's analysis amounted to "simple differences of opinion." The coalition asked Zuckerberg to "remove Facebook’s censorship, labeling, and restrictions on this article." 

“Amazingly, it worked. In September, Facebook removed the false rating, overruling the judgment of Science Feedback. According to the Wall Street Journal, Facebook found that the misinformation about climate models was an "opinion" and, therefore, not eligible for fact-checking.”

There’s that weaselly “opinion” word again.

In a surprise to no sentient human:

“Now, the CO2 Coalition has announced its intention to exploit this loophole to spread climate misinformation on Facebook.” 

Caleb Rossiter, the executive director the CO2 Coalition:

“Rossiter said Facebook was increasingly important because "the mainstream media" is no longer willing to amplify the group's opinions. But the reason the “mainstream media” is not willing to amplify the group’s opinions is that they’re not opinions at all. They’re falsehoods."

It’s always helpful to put a face to a muppet:

Here’s my two cents’ worth of investigative journalism to round this one off.

I’m sitting here thinking, “Who funds this dumbass CO2 coalition”?

One group is the Mercer Family Foundation.

Who the fuck are they?

Basically, they’re a fund to funnel millions into Conservative causes.

But why? Why them? Why Robert Mercer?

He was a computer scientist, then a hedge fund manager, then some other interesting stuff we’ll get to in a moment.

But what turned him against climate change and facts and shit? Was it a natural progression from simply being right-leaning? Because computer scientists are not typically known for immense stupidity when faced with truth-based ideas. So where does the kool aid bubble up from here?

It’s fascinating to me. There’s nothing clear in his Wikipedia biography that particularly motivates his anti-environment stance, apart from its apparent consistency with todays Conservative movement.

Side notes of interest: this was the guy that was the biggest investor in Cambridge Analytica at one point.

Via Cambridge Analytica he donated data analytics to Nigel Farange to help the Brexit vote win.

Cambridge Analytica was the group that illegally harvested millions of Facebook accounts for useful data.

That didn’t end well.

Mercer also funds Breitbart News. (which doesn’t get a hyperlink, sorry not sorry)

Icky, sticky.

Mercer was the single biggest donor in the 2016 US presidential race.

His favourite colour is orange.

Suffice to say, not really my kinda guy.

Note to readers: As I wrote all this down, my face felt like I’d just eaten a lemon.

It’s all a bit like documenting a grisly murder, making lists like these.

You’re always waiting for the upside, like, “He likes ice-cream, he’s not so bad, really!”

Never comes.

Today’s take-out message: Be less like this guy.