For years, it seems that ‘fact-checking’ articles and claims have been mainly the realm of leftists in the media. Most fact-checking groups and businesses seem to be left-leaning and show fairly obvious bias in their decisions. Snopes, PolitiFact, and others have long histories of showing a bias.
But what if someone fact-checked the fact-checkers? The Media Research Center asked just that question and is prepared to do something about it.
The Media Research Center (MRC)is a politically conservative organization that operates out of Virginia and aim to “expose and neutralize the propaganda arm of the left: the national news media.”
Over the years, they’ve watched as ‘fact-checkers’ became more important to news reporting, and as various news organizations used ‘fact-checkers’ to provide validity to questionable claims.
According to MRC President Brent Bozell, Americans deserve the truth, and he’s going to give it to them. As Bozell said, in an “era of ‘fake news’ and inaccurate reporting, it is important now more than ever” to make sure that they are accountable and truthful.
The program, which will be called Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers, will rate the claims of the liberal media outlets and their ‘fact-checking’ organizations and will find whether fact-checking organizations are telling the truth, or are targeting certain political groups or organizations more than others.
MRC will then assign its own rating system, and they say that they will even openly expose the ‘worst’ offenders.
MRC points out that according to recent polling, most American voters believe that ‘fact-checkers’ are biased in their operations.
Further, polling suggests that American trust in news media is extremely low. Only around a third of Americans believe the mass media and its stories.
Most of those who believe are democrats, whose viewpoints are over-represented in the mainstream media.
The Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers portion of MRC’s website is already up and operational, and it seems they hit the ground running.
A few of their recent findings showcase just how biased the ‘fact-checking’ websites of yesteryear were, and how poorly they researched many of their claims were.
A claim from PolitiFact earned a rating of ‘Fully Fake’ after the ‘fact-checking’ service failed to find anything factually questionable in Hillary Clinton’s book, What Happened.
In the whole book, the fact-checkers didn’t find ONE thing that they could rate ‘false.’
Of course, in the entire book, they didn’t look at too much, rating a handful of statements and declaring Hillary Clinton’s screed ‘honest.
Her book contains multiple lies, including a lie about how republicans at the RNC convention in Cleveland, Ohio sold souvenirs with the likeness of Kathy Griffin holding President Trump’s head. Even a Canadian journalist, Daniel Dale, pointed out this false account.
MRC’s next ‘Fully Fake’ rating goes out to a claim that an article about how Bowe Bergdahl ‘wandered away’ from his court hearings/trial was fake.
This claim, again from PolitiFact, ignores that the site which published the article, Duffel Blog, is a military humor/satire site.
It’s the enlisted man’s answer to The Onion and other great satirical publications.
The article, clearly a joke, was mocking the fact that Bowe Bergdahl wandered off the forward operating base he was deployed to, costing lives and effectively ending his military career.
It was apparently too much for the folks at PolitiFact to notice that the story was a joke on a website which hosts such great factual reporting as “Bowe Bergdahl to open Escape Room franchise outside Fort Bragg” and “86% of active-duty Marines watching porn right now, study finds.”
Fact-checking sites like PolitiFact and Snope seem to mostly lie and to give false impressions of the truthfulness of candidates in two ways.
Of course, the first is obvious. The sites can give politicians with the ‘D’ in front of their names a bit more leeway when determining their claims to be honest or dishonest or even ‘pants on fire.’
However, a more insidious way of ‘tipping the scales’ involves sites, such as PolitiFact, choosing what they are and are not going to review.
Look at the Hillary Clinton book. There are multiple lies in that book, many of which were obvious and completely impossible to debate as anything other than a ‘lie’ about factual information.
Somehow, PolitiFact didn’t notice any of those and instead focused on truthful statements by Hillary Clinton.
There’s a reason that Hillary Clinton has so many fewer ‘lie’ ratings across the various fact-checking sources. It has nothing to do with her being more honest than President Donald Trump.
It has to do with what fact-checkers choose to check or ignore. So Hillary Clinton, who lied repeatedly throughout her campaign, is somehow more truthful, by their reckoning, than President Donald Trump.
It’s nice to see someone finally providing some scrutiny to the fact-checkers. Hopefully, the Media Research Center will continue this worthwhile project.