Fact Checkers Mocked After Fact Checking A Rumored KFC Social Media Post About Black History Month And Fried Chicken
KFC found itself in a quick batch of hot water over the weekend when a tweet claiming that the brand had used a fried chicken drumstick to cast a shadow that was used to make the Black Power Fist icon synonymous with the social struggle of Blacks trying to rise up to oppression. The image claims that the drumstick Black Power Fist was in relation to Black History Month, which is where the fact-checkers got involved. The image itself was checked by Reuters and Snopes, and the image was given a mostly false rating.
The mostly false rating sparked a lot of discourse in the replies to both outlets reporting on the post. Angry Twitter users pointed out that even though the context of the image was photoshopped, with the Black History Month messaging being overlaid on top, an actual KFC-affiliated social media account posted it on Instagram, meaning the image itself, of the drumstick making the fist, is an officially endorsed piece of content.
This, in the eyes of many, would make the fact check mostly true, as KFC did create an image of a drumstick casting a shadow to make a Black Power Fist, which is what the viral social media status that brought attention to it was saying, with only the reason why they made it turning out to be false.
Share Pin
winton overwat
I don't think this should have gotten a "mostly true" though because there is some nuance to it. "Mixed" or "True but missing context" sound more appropriate.
RobyBang
Snopes be like:
"A meme on social media is claiming a prominent politician kicked a bag of puppies in a river. However, when looking at longer versions of the clip, there's only one puppy placed in the bag and he throws the bag, not kicks it. We rate this claim Mostly False."
Rynjin
Pretty much. I doubt anyone would have an issue if the text was the same but it was labeled as "Partly True" or even "Partly False".
Helipilot47
Literally what is the point of fact-checking if they're just going to lie like this.
It's like fact-checking sites don't understand how eroding their trustworthiness eliminates the reason anyone would want them in the first place.
A Concerned Rifleman
Fact-checking sites are there to give the illusion of legitimacy to the highest bidder. It's been like that since their inception.
WarLordM
They didn't lie though, they're technically correct. Which might actually be worse but it is true
ConspiracyNut
It's the best kind of correct. For lying.