Fact-Checking: A Joke That’s Not Funny
Liberal media outlets have begun to refer to the 2016 race as the “post-truth” election, and they certainly aren’t talking about the many lies of Hillary Clinton when they call it that. No, they’re talking about Donald Trump, who has racked up dozens of “Pants on Fire” ratings from PolitiFact and nearly 60 “Four Pinocchio” ratings from the Washington Post. To them, Trump is the first presidential candidate in history who built his campaign on nothing more than an endless series of blatant, outright lies.
If sites like PolitiFact and the Washington Post had a shred of credibility left, this would be a disturbing turn of events indeed. But that’s an “if” that’s not in the equation.
There was a time when it didn’t matter so much that mainstream newspapers and TV news broadcasts had a liberal bias to their reporting. It was there, but it didn’t kill the integrity of the news itself. You might find yourself rolling your eyes from time to time, but you didn’t feel like you were watching a news program from some strange alternative universe. Facts were facts. Reporters might nudge viewers and readers one way or the other with cherry-picked quotes, but they at least stayed within the boundaries of ethical journalism.
That time is behind us.
The state of today’s political news media would be bad enough if blatant liberal bias was the whole problem. But for these liars to then turn around and present themselves as “fact checkers” in our elections…well, that’s just a bridge too far.
Of course, it isn’t so simple as to say that these fact checking journalists spin fiction from whole cloth. That would just turn the Washington Post into the Weekly World News, and you’d soon find it in the supermarket checkout line, gathering dust. No, these elitist reporters can be accused of many things, but stupidity is not one of them. They know that the key to good propaganda lies in subtly bending the truth, not smashing it to smithereens.
So they use a variety of techniques to brainwash the American people. They pick and choose which “facts” to challenge and which ones to omit. They challenge statements of subjectivity as if you can declare an opinion “wrong.” When it comes to hard, numerical facts, they slam Republicans as liars when they are off by even a single digit and give Democrats the overwhelming benefit of the doubt, no matter how egregious the error.
And then they have the audacity to rub their hands nervously and tell us that “something” will have to be done about Fox News, Breitbart, and Rush Limbaugh.