Media "fact-checking" just keeps getting more shameless.
How it often works is quite simple. The question is either reframed to facilitate a desired outcome, or they just play stupid (or actually are stupid). A good example of the latter happened last year when the Washington Post's fact-checker took on the "incendiary claim that George Soros 'funds' Alvin Bragg.
Glenn Kessler found that Soros doesn't give money to Alvin Bragg. Why? Because Soros gives the money to an affiliated organization, and they give it to Bragg.
New #FactChecker -> The incendiary claim that George Soros ‘funds’ Alvin Bragg https://t.co/wQr4klYmkU
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) April 1, 2023
The Community Note on that one was well deserved.
Then there's PolitiFact, which does so much spinning on behalf of the Democrats that their website is sponsored by Dramamine.
Recommended
Our first example is this attempt to run cover for Kamala Harris and her past promise to have "mandatory gun buybacks" -- aka confiscation:
Trump said Harris "pledged to confiscate your guns." In 2019, Kamala Harris spoke in favor of “mandatory” programs to buy back assault weapons. As vice president, Harris has focused on other gun measures. She has not called for confiscating guns broadly. https://t.co/soLCbLloys
— PolitiFact (@PolitiFact) October 28, 2024
See how that works? Harris, just five years ago, said she supported confiscation but is now lying about her true beliefs because she has an election to win, so PolitiFact just takes her current claims at face value.
Did you actually read what you wrote before you posted it? Because it's self-refuting, you insufferable douchebags.
— Physics Geek (@physicsgeek) October 28, 2024
"Self-refuting" is a hallmark of a biased "fact-check."
The other game they like to play is just reframing the question to provide an assist. Everybody knows that illegal immigration exploded under Biden and Harris, but guess how PolitiFact helped out:
At a CNN town hall Oct. 23 in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Vice President Kamala Harris said, "As of today, we have cut the flow of immigration by over half.” Official federal data backs her up. https://t.co/QbCYHSmuBM
— PolitiFact (@PolitiFact) October 26, 2024
The time frame should be the entirety of the Biden-Harris administration, but in this case that was narrowed down to "over roughly the past year,” which wasn’t part of Harris’ claim. They put those words in her mouth to help her out. In the last few months they started having more border security because an election is approaching.
"As of today, we have cut the flow of immigration by over half," Harris told moderator Anderson Cooper Oct. 23.
She’s right. Depending on when you start counting, the drop is well over half.
"Depending on when you start counting," so of course PolitiFact started counting at the point that would be most favorable to Harris for their ruling.
Not true. They’ve changed the rules as to how they count them.
— Grumpy 🇺🇸🇮🇱🇺🇦 (@SameOldNancy) October 26, 2024
That too. It's sort of like how the Democrats say "crime is down," and it's because many areas stopped reporting crime data to the FBI.
They want to only count the last 3 months when they decided to do something for the election.
— JesterCat🇺🇸🎆🇺🇸 🃏😼 (@rnr_jeremy) October 26, 2024
And these "fact-checkers" were more than happy to oblige.
I can't wait to see what they have in store for us to explain how A) "Russia hacked our election" if Trump wins, or B) "This was the most secure election in history" if Harris wins.
