Ten Worst Fact Checks of the Election
The worst involves Medicare:
Let me point to the lowlight of the bunch, what we might call the “fact-checking” community’s Lie of the Year: when PolitiFact described a blatantly deceptive Obama campaign ad on Mitt Romney’s Medicare reform as “Mostly True.” The ad claimed that the Romney-Ryan plan “could raise future retirees’ costs more than $6,000,” when in fact the Romney-Ryan plan would increase future retiree’s costs by exactly zero, and in fact give them the opportunity to lower their out-of-pocket costs.
These aren’t opinions of mine — they are facts, based on the actual design of the Romney plan. The Romney plan, which was rolled out exactly one year ago today, guaranteed that all future retirees would continue to receive today’s Medicare benefits at no extra cost to them. The plan would open up the delivery of those benefits to a broad range of insurers, who would compete to offer those benefits at the most cost-efficient price. This competitive bidding process would drive Medicare costs down without compromising the care that retirees.
seems like it’s becoming popular to label your editorials as a “fact-check”
The term “fact-check” itself is a little misleading. It seems as though, if it were easy to establish “fact” versus “fiction” then everyone would simply agree. I think Seyyed is right — these are editorials on both sides. They all have data, but the data is meaningless unless you know how to interpret it. What is the expertise of these so-called fact-checkers?
Fact checkers are largely a joke. They are filled with opinions, and partisan biases.
@Jackson
NCPA fact checks abunch of quotes after each presidental debate.
Nowadays, it’s hard to tell who’s fact-checking who.
The proliferation of various Fact Checkers became so great that people finally got to the point where they realized many were partisan and stopped listening to them. In the 2008 election, fact checkers were considered relatively unbiased (even though they weren’t).
@Avik Roy — Please, no more election related news!!!
This is pretty biased, but as long as he doesn’t label it as a fact check I guess it is alright.
Fact checks meet their purpose when they are based on…well…facts! Opinion based statements are just…well…opinions. I hope I didn’t state the obvious.
As a fact checker, if you can’t support your point with valid and accurate material, then who are you trying to fool? Everyone knows the truth about “the actual design of the Romney plan,” they are just fooling themselves…if anyone.
You are right. Probably one of the worst fact checks I heard during this election season.