Don't Believe the Liberal "Fact-Checkers"!
More and more, major news outlets are relying on “fact checkers” to, allegedly, ensure that the news is factual, sources are reliable, and statements are accurate.
In theory, this is admirable. In practice, it has proven to be simply another opportunity for the media to push their leftist agenda.
Fact checking groups — such as PolitiFact — routinely cast judgments while failing to disclose their own left-wing bias. Their allies in the media try to cast these groups as neutral third parties when, in fact, they are card-carrying members of the liberal echo chamber.
It’s no wonder that the public has so little faith in the fact-checkers. A 2016 Rasmussen poll found that an astonishing 62% of American voters think the fact-check-ers are biased.
The Media Research Center is flipping the script on these faux-fact-checkers. It’s time to turn the tables and give the public the real facts.
The Washington Post "Fact Checker" completely avoided any Pinocchios for a fact-mangling Democrat again. That's because the liberals at the Post were upset at the conservative outrage that Rep. Ilhan Omar said "some people did something" on 9/11. The "fact" squad actually defended Omar by comparing her to President George W. Bush's speeches in the days after 9/11. In a speech at a CAIR fundraiser, Omar incorrectly claimed it was "founded after 9/11."
Twitchy asks an obvious question: Why does Snopes.com "keep doing fact-checking articles nobody thinks are real, especially one with easy-to-find disclaimers?" The latest example of Snopes feeling the need to do a "satire check" is a doozy: “Did a Brave Millennial Sell His Testicles to Raise Money for Bernie’s 2020 Campaign?” If you wonder if this could be true, you should probably not be voting. Let's guess that the answer to Twitchy's question is "clickbait."
The “fact checkers” keep sounding like they’re merely doing aggressive spin for the Democrats. On February 25, PolitiFact flagged Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) as “False” for writing in an Orlando Sentinel op-ed that the Green New Deal has a goal of “ending air travel.”
PolitiFact doesn't always apply neutral headlines in its "fact checks," as in this whopper from Monday: "Scientists’ response to Rush Limbaugh’s climate denial: ‘utter nonsense’." Over the years, PolitiFact has flagged Limbaugh on the "False" side almost 85 percent of the time -- which is even worse than Donald Trump's 69 percent "Mostly False" or worse percentage in 2017-18.
One way the "independent fact-checkers" damage their own credibility is by admitting a statement is "true," but by applying loads of context, it's actually "false." PolitiFact declared a Catholic bishop in Vermont as "Mostly False," even as they admitted what he said about an abortion-on-demand bill was "true in a strict legal sense."
The Washington Post Fact Checker squad sent Rep. Liz Cheney a nasty valentine on February 14, throwing a Three Pinocchios flag for speculation that the Democrats want to outlaw plane travel and cars. Fact-checkers generally can't help but clumsily apply a liberal bias in deciding who gets "Pinocchios" and who is "Pants on Fire." On the same Green New Deal documents, the Post's fact police gave Cheney a ticket and gave Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a Get Out of Fact Jail Free card.
Washington Post "Fact Checker" Glenn Kessler let a Democrat presidential candidate have it, the full "Four Pinocchios" rating -- for Sen. Kamala Harris claiming Trump's tax cut was actually a "middle-class tax hike." Now will she be asked about it by other reporters?
The Washington Post "Fact Checker" has thrown a penalty flag at freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D.-Minn.), but not about her scandalous chatter about Israel. It's about wages paid at McDonald's. She mangled her numbers badly -- by as much as 300 percent -- but chief "Fact Checker" Glenn Kessler only rated this as "2 Pinocchios," or "half true." Half?
The Washington Post Fact Checker page has a habit of “hiding the Pinocchios” for Democrats when liberal staffers aggressively engage them. This happened again early Monday with the much-mocked Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez talking points for the “Green New Deal.” Post “fact checker” Salvador Rizzo admitted the new congresswoman and her supporters misled the public, but they were “walked back,” so "we won't be awarding any Pinocchios in this kerfuffle."
Peter Hasson at the Daily Caller reported the liberal “fact checking” website Snopes.com acted like it couldn’t find the facts on Indian activist Nathan Phillips lying about serving in Vietnam. Snopes phrased it this way on their home page: “Did Nathan Phillips Falsely Claim He Was a Vietnam Veteran? Nuances frequently get lost amidst social media uproar and hastily filed news reports.” But it’s Snopes that can’t locate the evidence. They bizarrely rated it “Unproven” that Phillips lied about serving “in theater” in Vietnam.
The "Truth-o-Meter" at PolitiFact (and their subset PunditFact) is very strange machine. On January 11, PunditFact ruled it "HALF TRUE" when Sean Hannity proclaimed on his show on January 10 that "17,000 individuals with criminal records were apprehended trying to cross the border" in 2018. Hannity repeated that number on January 17. But they also admitted it was "basically correct."
The New York Times joined the rest of the liberal media in leaping on Trump's immigration address as "fact checkers." On Wednesday, a Times collective singled out eight claims from Trump....and only one rather flaccid mention of the Democrat response.