Comments on: Will fact-checking go the way of blogs? http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Jackelyn Albano http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-55259 Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:57:25 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-55259 Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wished to say that I’ve truly enjoyed surfing around your blog posts. After all I will be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!

]]>
By: Eddy Goelz http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-52094 Mon, 15 Sep 2014 19:43:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-52094 priligy forums www.createwebworks.com/ForumRetrieve.asp x?ForumID=2046&TopicID=635420 dapoxetine herbal dapoxetine hcl solubility.

]]>
By: Danny_Black http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35164 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:30:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35164 Also care to back up this claim?

“the reputation of the US suffered in the rest of the World under the last Republican Administration” – except amongst the left in Europe and mass-murderers in the Middle East?

]]>
By: Danny_Black http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35163 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:26:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35163 FifthDecade, the BBC regularly and consistently gets basic facts wrong. There is not even the pretence of being accurate. Neither does the Guardian. I remember you quoted them when they claimed the New of the World had deleted voicemails to try and get more scoops and thus caused the parents to believe she was alive. We now know for a fact the entire story was a complete fabrication.

Despite your clear disdain for them, facts do exist and do matter and the media in both the US and UK are simply appalling in the way they deal with them, with the NYT being one of the worst offenders.

]]>
By: Frwip http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35154 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 04:35:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35154 I thought there was something even more interesting in Brisbane’s silly question : his very example of what “truth vigilantism” would be.

“The president has never used the word ‘apologize’ in a speech about U.S. policy or history. Any assertion that he has apologized for U.S. actions rests on a misleading interpretation of the president’s words.”

Whether Obama used the precise word ‘apologize’ is irrelevant and trivial. What matters is the substance, addressed in the second sentence but only with the very weak “misleading”.

Krugman got it right and wrote what any decent journalist should report (and be ready to defend in a further article if called on it):

” Mr. Romney’s frequent suggestion that the president has gone around the world “apologizing for America.” (This) is a popular theme on the right — but the so-called Obama apology tour is a complete fabrication, assembled by taking quotes out of context. ”

Now, the Romney campaign would pay attention (and I would start to pay attention the NY Times’ reporting).

But back to Brisbane, it looks like his very notion of “truth” and “objectivity” is itself trivial, formalistic.

And indeed, it seems to me that fact-checking often devolved into this kind of triviality, whether he or she used that precise word or got the date and place for such and such event exactly right, etc. That the kind of fact-checking we can do without.

The real question is whether or not journalists must exercise factually well-informed judgement and publish it. And the answer is “Hell yes !!!” but it’s expansive, painstaking, occasionally risky and, specifically in the frenetic real time of politics, certainly very arduous.

]]>
By: FifthDecade http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35153 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 04:18:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35153 Regarding the difference between the UK and US media, in the US the media is all privately owned, for profit and so the advertiser rules; in the UK, although there is a large privately owned print media, the BBC is the main conduit for news dissemination encompassing Radio, TV and the internet (www.bbc.co.uk/news) – and is paid for by public subscription. It is independent of both government influence and commercial control and doesn’t care much who it irritates. Although it has moved in recent years to a more sensationalist way of reporting stories, I’d always prefer the output of the Beeb than of one of the main TV channels.

One example: American TV Network News shows a clip of a news conference but tells you what the person said; the BBC shows the same clip and let’s you hear what the person said. It is astonishing how often the version given by the US anchor is rather different to what the person actually said, and is coloured by the personal and editorial angle that Network and anchor seek to convey.

In short, I do think the UK is more factual, and more than that, its facts are more reliable too.

]]>
By: MKCurious http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35149 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 23:50:40 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35149 The problem with giving a journal a fact-checking role is that such a role is likely to have a clear bias to the right or left. I am more likely to catch inaccuracies on the right than on the left. On the other hand, the NYT has a tendency to regurgitate statements of established groups–for example the various blatant lies issued by the Mubarak regime during the Tahrir square events. Even if the NYT doesn’t want to check every fact, it could provide an indication of which of its sources is on firmer factual ground than others.

]]>
By: realist50 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35148 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:54:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35148 This idea is nice in theory, but PolitiFact’s track record suggests that this won’t be done well if it does happen. As evidence, I note its choice for 2011 “Lie of the Year” – that the Paul Ryan Medicare plan would “end Medicare” – as well as the 2010 “Lie of the Year” being the claim that the healthcare law is a “government takeover of healthcare”. Both claims are political exaggerations – more accurate statements would be that the Ryan plan “fundamentally changes Medicare (from a fee for service system to a voucher based system)” or that the healthcare act “dramatically expands federal government involvement in the healthcare system, particularly with respect to health insurance.” It is arguable that either “Lie of the Year” is a true statement, however.

I particularly worry if political reporters start trying to parse and correct economic statements, since it rarely appears that political reporters understand much economics.

]]>
By: GRRR http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35139 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:27:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35139 Well, I for one, am tired of the media acting as an echo chamber for lies. Politicians, lawyers and issue-advocates of all stripes know this weakness of the 24/7 news, and use it to their advantage.

]]>
By: Eericsonjr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/18/will-fact-checking-go-the-way-of-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-35133 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:23:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11906#comment-35133 Wait, “bloggier”=more factual? UK reporting in general is more factual?

]]>