8 ms·

Do you have some examples of where you don't agree with the fact-checking services of any of the sources you've shared?

0xy 6y ago
Sure, a notable recent example is Politifact labeling Biden's comments that busing would turn schools into a "racial jungle" as "half true", even though the statement was actually stated by him and is on record. [1] There's an entire website dedicated to their bias. [2] Another obvious point of bias was Politifact labeling a statement by Trump that "CNN did a poll where Obama and I are tied" as "pants on fire" because it was "one poll" (he never stated otherwise). [3] [1] https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2020/07/10/politifact-nervously-tries-add-context-bidens-old-racial-jungle https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2020/07/10/p... [2] https://www.politifactbias.com/ https://www.politifactbias.com/ [3] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/apr/27/donald-trump/trump-says-recent-cnn-poll-shows-him-competitive-c/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/apr/27/donald-tru...
- viraptor 6y ago
  The way I understand it, they object to the "CNN did a poll" part. There's one poll that exists with a close result, but it's not a CNN poll. It means we don't even know if he got lucky with a lie, or did he know about that poll and made a mistake about the source. (Fwiw, I agree it's not a pants on fire situation. (Mostly) false, sure.)
- mhh__ 6y ago
  > [3] From 2011, is that the best you have?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- peteretep 6y ago
  To your point 3: https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/27/trump-cites-cnn-poll-but-cnn-didnt-conduct-such-a-poll/ https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/27/trump-cites... « “CNN did a poll recently where President Obama and I are statistically tied,” Trump told reporters Wednesday morning upon arriving in New Hampshire. “If you would like, I can send it to you. Call up CNN.” CNN didn’t conduct such a survey.»
insickness 6y ago
‘Impartial’ fact-checkers are revealing their partisanship against Trump https://nypost.com/2019/02/09/impartial-fact-checkers-are-revealing-their-partisanship-against-trump/ https://nypost.com/2019/02/09/impartial-fact-checkers-are-re...
- Semaphor 6y ago
  Can someone explain to me why this is downvoted? The examples seem to support OPs point and seem pretty damning to me.
  - valvar 6y ago
    A lot of people flag according to their own political position, not the quality or validity of the content.
  - Svip 6y ago
    The first example makes me question the rest of their examples. I find it noticeable that they are reluctant to link to the fact checking they are referencing. The first mentions Politico contending that "one in third" is only 'partly true'. Yet the closest I can find to Politico fact checking that line,[0] is merely a reference to the Doctors Without Borders report, without any mention of how true it is (besides, Politico doesn't really do fact checking either, nor claim to be impartial). Edit: Looks like it happened on Twitter (see reply), so I stand corrected. That being said, I am confident there are biases in fact checking, all humans are subjective. And even if every fact check a site did was impartial, their choice in which things they choose to fact check would surely be not, or at least be open for questioning. What makes one statement more worthy of a fact check than another? [0] https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/trump-state-of-the-union-2019-live-fact-check-transcript-2/5/19/ https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/trump-state-of-th... and search for "one in three"
    - Udik 6y ago
      > Yet the closest I can find to Politico fact checking that line,[0] is merely a reference to the Doctors Without Borders report https://twitter.com/politico/status/1093001428900237312?lang=en https://twitter.com/politico/status/1093001428900237312?lang...
Udik 6y ago
tl;dr: My impression is that if we checked the narrative of the left with the same rigor we use for that of the right, a lot of news would disappear from social media. This WP title and article: http://archive.is/GvfHd http://archive.is/GvfHd It proclaims, without a hint of a doubt: "A ‘mass invasion’ of polar bears is terrorizing an island town. Climate change is to blame." The article is about a single episode of a population of polar bears feeding off a garbage dump in a remote Russian village. It's hard (or just simply wrong) to attribute a single episode to a global climate shift. And experts have pointed out that the bears appear well fed and that garbage can be attractive to them [1]. The article ends by linking the "heartbreaking video" of a sick, emaciated polar bear wandering somewhere in Canada. The video was widely spread as a proof of climate change harm to polar bears, but experts said it was probably just a sick individual. National Geographic itself had to publish a correction a year later [2]. Now imagine a conservative media making such quick connections between, say, a bump in immigration rates and a crime. Or even saying: "that crime spree? Immigration is to blame". That's obvious fake news, right? [1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/12/18222072/polar-bear-invasion-novaya-zemlya-russia-garbage-climate-change https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/12/18222072/polar-bear-invas... [2] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/08/explore-through-the-lens-starving-polar-bear-photo/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/08/explore-...
- ianleeclark 6y ago
  Climate change isn't a partisan issue. Policy will be, but the "narrative," as you call it is established science. > Now imagine a conservative media making such quick connections between, say, a bump in immigration rates and a crime. Or even saying: "that crime spree? Immigration is to blame". That's obvious fake news, right? Both illegal and legal immigrant groups have lower incarceration rates than native born Americans. So, whenever a right-wing pundit says that immigration is to blame for crime rising, there likely is statistical fuckery or outright lies. However, it is hilarious how, even while being treated with kid gloves, you are still whinging about there being a bias against the right wing.
  - Udik 6y ago
    > Both illegal and legal immigrant groups have lower incarceration rates than native born Americans. So, whenever a right-wing pundit says that immigration is to blame for crime rising, there likely is statistical fuckery or outright lies. I needed an example and honestly made up one- I had no idea of the situation in the US and I find these statistics very interesting, thanks! The reason I chose this particular example is because in Italy- where I'm from- the statistics are the total opposite: more than 1/3 of all inmates are foreigners, with some ethnicities wildly over-represented in proportion to their share in the population. The connection between immigration and crime rates is one of the most used right-wing arguments and topic of contention between left and right in Italy.

0xy 6y ago

Sure, a notable recent example is Politifact labeling Biden's comments that busing would turn schools into a "racial jungle" as "half true", even though the statement was actually stated by him and is on record. [1] There's an entire website dedicated to their bias. [2] Another obvious point of bias was Politifact labeling a statement by Trump that "CNN did a poll where Obama and I are tied" as "pants on fire" because it was "one poll" (he never stated otherwise). [3] [1] https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2020/07/10/politifact-nervously-tries-add-context-bidens-old-racial-jungle https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2020/07/10/p... [2] https://www.politifactbias.com/ https://www.politifactbias.com/ [3] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/apr/27/donald-trump/trump-says-recent-cnn-poll-shows-him-competitive-c/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2011/apr/27/donald-tru...

viraptor 6y ago
The way I understand it, they object to the "CNN did a poll" part. There's one poll that exists with a close result, but it's not a CNN poll. It means we don't even know if he got lucky with a lie, or did he know about that poll and made a mistake about the source. (Fwiw, I agree it's not a pants on fire situation. (Mostly) false, sure.)
mhh__ 6y ago
> [3] From 2011, is that the best you have?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
peteretep 6y ago
To your point 3: https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/27/trump-cites-cnn-poll-but-cnn-didnt-conduct-such-a-poll/ https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/27/trump-cites... « “CNN did a poll recently where President Obama and I are statistically tied,” Trump told reporters Wednesday morning upon arriving in New Hampshire. “If you would like, I can send it to you. Call up CNN.” CNN didn’t conduct such a survey.»

insickness 6y ago

‘Impartial’ fact-checkers are revealing their partisanship against Trump https://nypost.com/2019/02/09/impartial-fact-checkers-are-revealing-their-partisanship-against-trump/ https://nypost.com/2019/02/09/impartial-fact-checkers-are-re...

Semaphor 6y ago
Can someone explain to me why this is downvoted? The examples seem to support OPs point and seem pretty damning to me.
- valvar 6y ago
  A lot of people flag according to their own political position, not the quality or validity of the content.
- Svip 6y ago
  The first example makes me question the rest of their examples. I find it noticeable that they are reluctant to link to the fact checking they are referencing. The first mentions Politico contending that "one in third" is only 'partly true'. Yet the closest I can find to Politico fact checking that line,[0] is merely a reference to the Doctors Without Borders report, without any mention of how true it is (besides, Politico doesn't really do fact checking either, nor claim to be impartial). Edit: Looks like it happened on Twitter (see reply), so I stand corrected. That being said, I am confident there are biases in fact checking, all humans are subjective. And even if every fact check a site did was impartial, their choice in which things they choose to fact check would surely be not, or at least be open for questioning. What makes one statement more worthy of a fact check than another? [0] https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/trump-state-of-the-union-2019-live-fact-check-transcript-2/5/19/ https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/trump-state-of-th... and search for "one in three"
  - Udik 6y ago
    > Yet the closest I can find to Politico fact checking that line,[0] is merely a reference to the Doctors Without Borders report https://twitter.com/politico/status/1093001428900237312?lang=en https://twitter.com/politico/status/1093001428900237312?lang...

Udik 6y ago

tl;dr: My impression is that if we checked the narrative of the left with the same rigor we use for that of the right, a lot of news would disappear from social media. This WP title and article: http://archive.is/GvfHd http://archive.is/GvfHd It proclaims, without a hint of a doubt: "A ‘mass invasion’ of polar bears is terrorizing an island town. Climate change is to blame." The article is about a single episode of a population of polar bears feeding off a garbage dump in a remote Russian village. It's hard (or just simply wrong) to attribute a single episode to a global climate shift. And experts have pointed out that the bears appear well fed and that garbage can be attractive to them [1]. The article ends by linking the "heartbreaking video" of a sick, emaciated polar bear wandering somewhere in Canada. The video was widely spread as a proof of climate change harm to polar bears, but experts said it was probably just a sick individual. National Geographic itself had to publish a correction a year later [2]. Now imagine a conservative media making such quick connections between, say, a bump in immigration rates and a crime. Or even saying: "that crime spree? Immigration is to blame". That's obvious fake news, right? [1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/12/18222072/polar-bear-invasion-novaya-zemlya-russia-garbage-climate-change https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/12/18222072/polar-bear-invas... [2] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/08/explore-through-the-lens-starving-polar-bear-photo/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/08/explore-...

ianleeclark 6y ago
Climate change isn't a partisan issue. Policy will be, but the "narrative," as you call it is established science. > Now imagine a conservative media making such quick connections between, say, a bump in immigration rates and a crime. Or even saying: "that crime spree? Immigration is to blame". That's obvious fake news, right? Both illegal and legal immigrant groups have lower incarceration rates than native born Americans. So, whenever a right-wing pundit says that immigration is to blame for crime rising, there likely is statistical fuckery or outright lies. However, it is hilarious how, even while being treated with kid gloves, you are still whinging about there being a bias against the right wing.
- Udik 6y ago
  > Both illegal and legal immigrant groups have lower incarceration rates than native born Americans. So, whenever a right-wing pundit says that immigration is to blame for crime rising, there likely is statistical fuckery or outright lies. I needed an example and honestly made up one- I had no idea of the situation in the US and I find these statistics very interesting, thanks! The reason I chose this particular example is because in Italy- where I'm from- the statistics are the total opposite: more than 1/3 of all inmates are foreigners, with some ethnicities wildly over-represented in proportion to their share in the population. The connection between immigration and crime rates is one of the most used right-wing arguments and topic of contention between left and right in Italy.