"Culture is the passion for Sweetness and Light, and what is more, the passion for making them prevail." - Matthew Arnold

« Shocker: NYT Doesn’t Buy Blackwater’s Version | Home | Egyptians Still Want Female Genital Mutilation »

Washington Post To Start ‘Fact Checking’

From those masters of prevarication at the Washington Post:

[The Fact Checker]

Wednesday, September 19, 2007; Page A06

A presidential campaign is a war of words, not all of them completely accurate, and trying to sort truth from half-truth has traditionally been our job. But the claims and counterclaims of the 2008 candidates now flow, tsunami-like, on blogs, video, talk radio and e-mail.

To help our readers stay on top of this information, we introduce The Fact Checker, the place to go for impartial refereeing of campaign rhetoric.

The Fact Checker will examine controversial claims and statements involving important national issues, including the war in Iraq, immigration, health care, social issues, the economy and the records of the various candidates. It will appear in The Post and at washingtonpost.com.

When we come across a statement at variance with the facts, as best we can establish them, we will point it out. When we find that something is subject to several interpretations, we will also point that out. And whenever possible, we will make a judgment, symbolized by the figure in folklore — and Walt Disney movies — most associated with something less than the truth: Pinocchio.

Our official Pinocchio rating will rate candidates’ statements on a scale of one to four.

On occasion it may not be possible to render a snap judgment because the issue is complex or there are strong arguments on both sides. In such cases, we will withhold our judgment until we can gather more facts.

We will use this column and our companion Web site feature to try to shed as much light as possible on factual controversies that are not easily resolved.

All judgments are subject to debate, second-guessing and criticism from our readers and interested parties — including the campaigns — and will be revised if fresh evidence emerges.
We invite you to continue the discussion on the Web, and to suggest subjects to fact-check, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/factchecker. Significant new fact-check items will also be posted on The Trail, our daily diary of Campaign 2008.

Jiminy Cricket, what a laugh riot.

The adage “physician heal thyself” leaps to mind.

For instance:

And whenever possible, we will make a judgment, symbolized by the figure in folklore — and Walt Disney movies…

The Walt Disney company has thus far produced only one Pinocchio movie.

Going out on a limb and assuming that the rest of the “facts” in this article are accurate, we are awarding this article three (out of a possible five) Pinocchios:

  

Which, sadly, is a better rating than most Post stories would get.

Related Articles:

  Print Email

12 Responses to “Washington Post To Start ‘Fact Checking’”

  1. Lipstick on a PIAPS

    Washington Post checking up on Political “facts”? I guess they are going for the Pulitzer Prize, for HUMOR! This rag couldn’t lie straight in bed.

  2. ATLien

    Did anyone hear about the Belgium guy who took out an article on ebay for people to bid on Belgium. How funny would it be to make an add that says “for sale: Democratic party”

    then have some smart ass comments like, “previous owners, moveon.org. , communist USSR, and whoever has money” I think that they would start getting the drift.

  3. wardmama4

    Ah the msm is in a quandry - to admit that they lie, to keep pretending they don’t lie or to lie somewhere inbetween. They apparently chose to imply that only Pols lie (sometimes).

    Gotta love the internet - catching the lies and the liars who tell them in nanoseconds. And at the same time making the msm obsolete.

    Ain’t America Grand?

  4. texaspsue

    ATLien…what a hilarious idea, I love it. Seriously, someone should do it!

    SG…you are being too kind. I would have given the Washington Post only one pinocchio. (Would a 1/2 Pinocchio be too gross?)

  5. studmuffin

    Can anyone find a graphic of the mohammedan Pinocchio after he converted to islam? I think that would be most appropriate for Pinocchio ratings, especially if the New York Times is ever rated.

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articl.....59,00.html

  6. texaspsue

    OMG, studmuffin. I had never read that article. They can’t have Pinocchio and I really am upset about Tom Sawyer. I hope someone finds a picture of the islamic pinocchio……..I’ve got to see this.

  7. studmuffin

    Maybe we could photoshop him into a burqa.

  8. Landshark

    Well, I guess better late than never that they are checking facts.

  9. SG

    Yeah, we posted about that too, SM:

    Schoolbooks Make Pinocchio, Tom Sawyer Muslim | Sweetness & Light
    http://sweetness-light.com/arc.....yer-muslim

  10. SG

    “Well, I guess better late than never that they are checking facts.”

    But only Republican candidates’ facts. Not their own.

  11. Landshark

    “But only Republican candidates’ facts. Not their own.”

    But of course. Our media makes the North Korean media look independent.

  12. fight_the_good_fight

    It is a said state of affairs in the modern media world when a news outlet actually doing fact checking is considered news.


Leave a Reply

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.


« Front Page | To Top
« Shocker: NYT Doesn’t Buy Blackwater’s Version | Egyptians Still Want Female Genital Mutilation »