1 Answer

0 like 0 dislike
by Newbie (450 points)
While yes it might not be the safest due to the fire hazard it apposes. However when first reading this statement I assumed that it meant it wasn't safe to eat compared to it not being safe to cook. The source was reliable and factual I just found the statement to be slightly misleading.
Exaggerated/ Misleading
by Apprentice (1.0k points)
0 0
I agree that the statement is misleading and doesn’t give us enough information u til we actually read the source. I would have been interested to see how you felt more on this and if you believed it was totally false or true once reading the source and your own personal thoughts on the article, but overall I did agree with what you said! It was well worded and straight to the point!

Community Rules


Be respectful.

There is bound to be disagreement on a site about misinformation. Assume best intentions on everyone's part.

If you are new to factchecking, take some time to learn about it. "How to Factcheck" has some resources for getting started. Even if you disagree with these materials, they'll help you understand the language of this community better.

News Detective is for uncovering misinformation and rumors. This is not a general interest question-answer site for things someone could Google.

Posting

The title is the "main claim" that you're trying to factcheck.

Example:
Factcheck This: Birds don't exist

If possible, LINK TO to the place you saw the claim.

Answering

LINK TO YOUR EVIDENCE or otherwise explain the source ("I called this person, I found it in this book, etc.")

But don't just drop a link. Give an explanation, copy and paste the relevant information, etc.

News Detective is not responsible for anything anyone posts on the platform.
...