5 ms·

It's more reasonable to assume that all politicians lie the same and "fact checkers" are biased against one party.

by hbossy 4y ago

bildung 4y ago
Why would you think that? It's clear that different political parties are driven by different value systems (more obviously in other countries than the US, but still), thus also quite plausable that those value systems differ in their judgement of the end justifying the means.
Spivak 4y ago
That would probably your a priori assumption since that would be your motivation to do the study in the first place. But it's not some fundamental law of the universe, so you can't just count lies/total grouped by party and conclude bias. You have to prove that for the same claims politifact would rate Republican's worse and Democrats better or establish some kind of control. Because it's not necessarily either bais or that Republicans lie more, it could also be that politifact is asked to rate statements that are obvious lies by Republicans more often.
- knightofmars 4y ago
  >Because it's not necessarily either bais or that Republicans lie more, it could also be that Politifact is asked to rate statements that are obvious lies by Republicans more often. Agreed, the statements that Politifact chooses to cover are contentious and have high visibility. In the specific set of data points that were used to evaluate Politifact, a larger percentage of the statements made by Republicans are classified lies and more harshly (see article below from 2011). This proves nothing about the overall number of lies made by individuals within the Republican and Democrat parties. There are numerous ways this sort of situation within Politifact can come about even after excluding bias from Politifact. For example, a unique time period in which a small number of individuals who identify as Republicans are independently making more outrageous claims which skews the result. Or a time period in which a specific talking point (generally proven false) is being pushed as a narrative by a portion of a party but not a majority of the party (e.g., the 2020 election was stolen, or Donald Trump colluded with Russia during the 2016 elections). Point being, reaching the conclusion that Republicans lie more via Politifact or the findings of the original study is a fallacy. And reaching the conclusion that Politifact is biased is also a fallacy. The original article here: https://archive.ph/Drhw https://archive.ph/Drhw
secondhandle 4y ago
If anything this viewpoint is unreasonable and forms the basis of an informal fallacy, among the lines of a false equivalence. You are claiming an equivalent outcome based on an oversimplification to one factor ("all politicians lie the same") and/or ignorance of the plethora of factors that separate (and yes, in some cases confound) both parties. I know plenty of Republicans who think Democrats lie more and I know plenty of Democrats who think Republicans lie more. But I wouldn't justify a false compromise through anecdotal evidence.

It's more reasonable to assume that all politicians lie the same and "fact checkers" are biased against one party.

by hbossy 4y ago

It's more reasonable to assume that all politicians lie the same and "fact checkers" are biased against one party.

Why would you think that? It's clear that different political parties are driven by different value systems (more obviously in other countries than the US, but still), thus also quite plausable that those value systems differ in their judgement of the end justifying the means.

Spivak 4y ago

That would probably your a priori assumption since that would be your motivation to do the study in the first place. But it's not some fundamental law of the universe, so you can't just count lies/total grouped by party and conclude bias. You have to prove that for the same claims politifact would rate Republican's worse and Democrats better or establish some kind of control. Because it's not necessarily either bais or that Republicans lie more, it could also be that politifact is asked to rate statements that are obvious lies by Republicans more often.

knightofmars 4y ago
>Because it's not necessarily either bais or that Republicans lie more, it could also be that Politifact is asked to rate statements that are obvious lies by Republicans more often. Agreed, the statements that Politifact chooses to cover are contentious and have high visibility. In the specific set of data points that were used to evaluate Politifact, a larger percentage of the statements made by Republicans are classified lies and more harshly (see article below from 2011). This proves nothing about the overall number of lies made by individuals within the Republican and Democrat parties. There are numerous ways this sort of situation within Politifact can come about even after excluding bias from Politifact. For example, a unique time period in which a small number of individuals who identify as Republicans are independently making more outrageous claims which skews the result. Or a time period in which a specific talking point (generally proven false) is being pushed as a narrative by a portion of a party but not a majority of the party (e.g., the 2020 election was stolen, or Donald Trump colluded with Russia during the 2016 elections). Point being, reaching the conclusion that Republicans lie more via Politifact or the findings of the original study is a fallacy. And reaching the conclusion that Politifact is biased is also a fallacy. The original article here: https://archive.ph/Drhw https://archive.ph/Drhw

secondhandle 4y ago

If anything this viewpoint is unreasonable and forms the basis of an informal fallacy, among the lines of a false equivalence. You are claiming an equivalent outcome based on an oversimplification to one factor ("all politicians lie the same") and/or ignorance of the plethora of factors that separate (and yes, in some cases confound) both parties. I know plenty of Republicans who think Democrats lie more and I know plenty of Democrats who think Republicans lie more. But I wouldn't justify a false compromise through anecdotal evidence.