SCOTUS Won’t Hear Candace Owens’ Complaint About Being Fact-Checked on Facebook

Candace Owens failed to elicit sympathy from a conservative-majority SCOTUS over being fact-checked by Facebook.

The Supreme Court rejected her petition over fact-checks that labeled posts she made about COVID-19 on Facebook as “hoaxes” or “false.”

Owens claimed that her income was “severely” damaged due to what she says amounted to “tortious interference” since she primarily interfaces with Facebook as her primary marketplace.

The complaint read in part, “Instead of publishing editorials to counter Owens’ speech, both Lead Stories and USA Today chose to publish articles that purported to ‘fact check’ Owens’ claims. No mere rhetorical device, by labeling their articles ‘Face Checks,’ both Respondents knew that they would trigger their contractual agreement with Facebook, by which Facebook has agreed to remove or otherwise obscure or limit any posts that its contractees, acting pursuant to its fact-check contract, determine to be ‘false.'”

Because both companies found Owens’ research and conclusions false, Owens’ posts received a “FALSE” warning, which she claims led to the canceling of her advertising contract with Facebook and loss of income.

Owens tried to turn it into a First Amendment case, but even the people who ostensibly agreed with her on most things declined to get involved in the SCOTUS.

The easier way to avoid getting fact-checked is not to lie – but that doesn’t get publicity.


Comments are closed.