About Opinion As Fact:

It’s easy to accuse, willy-nilly, almost any statement of being Opinion As Fact. So, the criticism should only be levied in a certain kind of situation: where (1) the specific audience at the time is vulnerable to being misled and (2) the speaker is guilty of either reckless disregard for the truth, purely self-serving objectives, or actual intent to deceive. The issuer aims to eliminate complexity and present their viewpoint as the only reasonable one, implicitly dismissing counter-arguments off the bat.

To avoid this critique, the speaker need only include a minimal caveat. For example, “Some might disagree, but…”, or “Based on what I’ve seen…” Any tiny admission that there is not complete certainty. Again, we should not expect social media posters to do this every time they post an opinion. But they should treat their audience with dignity and avoid misleading them. It’s related to No Context in that supporting information and context are typically not provided.

Audiences may even be actively discouraged from seeking out other opinions, such as when Australian chef turned Paleo diet promoter Pete Evans told a woman with osteoporosis that she should stop consuming dairy products because they “remove calcium from bones”; when she suggested that she’d check with her doctor on his false statement, he said “most doctors do not know this information.”

Partisan politicians and propagandists are especially prone to stating opinions as though they are incontestable facts. Their goal is not informing to educate, but rather, cementing a narrative that they need their followers to absorb. The audience, particularly those unfamiliar with the topic, might accept the issuer’s opinion as a factual representation of reality, further entrenching their own biases or misconceptions.