The "Truth-O-Meter" Showing Up In Papers

[mrjarrell]

I wish this existed in any form in our locale. It would be refreshing to have reporters dedicated to calling BS when a politician opens their lying mouth.

As 'Truth-O-Meter' Spreads, Politicians Wince : NPR

 

[dross]

I like the idea of calling BS on politicians who screw with the facts. The problem is that the "fact-checkers" are so often biased that they tend to find a way to side with the guys they agree with, while bending over backwards to make their ideological opponents out to be liars.

What would be truly interesting is a nuetral group (and the only way to achieve that is to have opposing ideologies on the committee) who delved into these claims. I think that eventually something like that would be very large. I'd love a place I trusted that I could check with on some of the claims these guys make. I just don't have the time to look up every study and primary source and form my own opinion. And this is from an issues and politics geek who does spend a lot of time doing just that. The average person who just wants to find out what's going on over his cereal or at night after supper just has a ring in his nose because he's not got the time or the tools to separate fact from fiction.

 

[mrjarrell]

That's what seems to be going on with this program. They've been impartial so far and called out pols from both sides. I do hope it could spread and retain the impartiality they've shown so far.

 

[Yeah]

I have a difficult time putting much trust in an organization that represents truth with a graphical representation of an analog meter. There ain't no such thing as halfway crooks.

 

[308jake]

The Daily Reporter in Hancock County posts this once a week or so.

 

[dross]

That's what seems to be going on with this program. They've been impartial so far and called out pols from both sides. I do hope it could spread and retain the impartiality they've shown so far.

I just looked through the site extensively. I'd say it's pretty heavily biased left. Take a look at their "Pants on Fire" ratings. Several conservative statements for every statement from the left. Also, they do a lot more explaining for the left, whereas they're holding the right to pretty exact standards.

Also, they ignore some pretty blatant statements from the left that are lies.

Reminds me a little of snopes. You can get some good info there, but the bias is still evident.

 

[beararms1776]

I just looked through the site extensively. I'd say it's pretty heavily biased left. Take a look at their "Pants on Fire" ratings.

 

[TopDog]

I like the idea of calling BS on politicians who screw with the facts. The problem is that the "fact-checkers" are so often biased that they tend to find a way to side with the guys they agree with, while bending over backwards to make their ideological opponents out to be liars.

What would be truly interesting is a nuetral group (and the only way to achieve that is to have opposing ideologies on the committee) who delved into these claims. I think that eventually something like that would be very large. I'd love a place I trusted that I could check with on some of the claims these guys make. I just don't have the time to look up every study and primary source and form my own opinion. And this is from an issues and politics geek who does spend a lot of time doing just that. The average person who just wants to find out what's going on over his cereal or at night after supper just has a ring in his nose because he's not got the time or the tools to separate fact from fiction.

Excellent point made above ^.

Its just like the web site snoops. I have found that snoops is very much "Liberal Orientated"

I also spent some time on the web site and I would say it leans to the left also.

It's a great idea but unless you get unbiased neutral people running the Truth O Meter your still going to have slants. And slanting left is what I see on the web site.

By the way the "Pants on Fire" is amusing. Who cares if BO was or was not in a Rap video?

 

[Blackhawk2001]

By the way the "Pants on Fire" is amusing. Who cares if BO was or was not in a Rap video?

"It's not the evidence available, it's the seriousness of the charges!"

 

[Blue Tile Spook]

I have a similar problems when articles are published in various newspapers, written by such-and-such think tank. Without researching the think tank's political persuasion if it is one that I am not familiar with, it leaves me scratching my head if it is a conservative writer in a progressive tank or a progressive writer in a conservative tank.

Ask the newspaper and they tell me that they take no sides - "We're unbiased." No one is unbiased.

 

[rockhopper46038]

Is this the one from the Annenburg Foundation (or some spelling variant)? They are a big sponsor of National Public Radio. Read into that what you will.