Well, That Kind of Stretches the Definition of ”Fact Check” Doesn’t It?

BOMBSHELL: In court filing, Facebook admits ‘fact checks’ are nothing more than opinion – Watts Up With That?

In its response to Stossel’s defamation claim, Facebook responds on Page 2, Line 8 in the court document (download it below) that Facebook cannot be sued for defamation (which is making a false and harmful assertion) because its ‘fact checks’ are mere statements of opinion rather than factual assertions.
Opinions are not subject to defamation claims, while false assertions of fact can be subject to defamation. The quote in Facebook’s complaint is,

“The labels themselves are neither false nor defamatory; to the contrary, they constitute protected opinion.”

Read the whole thing. I don’t see how they can continue to call them “fact checks”. I also thinks this puts their ability to censor posts based on “misinformation” in jeopardy.