When it comes to fact-checking...
Fact-checking has become much more important since #DishonestDonnie moved into the Oval Office. Politicians have been misleading, less than honest and told whoppers for centuries. But none of our nation's leaders have been as blatantly dishonest as the #LiarInChief.
As I said in my recent blog about her proposal to raise the top marginal tax rate to 70%, I'm a big fan of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Now the Washington Post has given her a rating of Four Pinocchios for a tweet she made this past Sunday.
Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez went on to ask some excellent questions about the fact-checking process.
Her question where she points out that Politifact has fact-checked her the same number of times it has fact-checked Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a excellent question. Why haven't they fact-checked the statement from Ms Huckabee Sanders regarding 4,000 terrorists entering the U.S. by violating our southern border; a statement which is "pants-on-fire" dishonest?
As to the choices of those engaged in checking fact, regarding which ones they issue ratings on, I go back to an adage from my long-ago days in the news biz. If it bleeds, it leads. The statements that are taken up by fact-checkers are those that are newsworthy, controversial, and/or blatantly wrong.
The tweet from Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez about $21 trillion in Pentagon financial transactions that could not be tracked makes it appear that there was $21 trillion lost by the accountants in that famed five-sided building. That's just wrong. Total spending on defense by the U.S. since 1940 doesn't total $21 trillion. In fact, there isn't missing money, there are improperly labeled accounting entries that don't meet proper auditing standards.
$21 trillion is a huge number. The entire U.S. national debt is currently $21.9 trillion. When you make a sweeping statement about how this pot of missing money could be used to pay for a program you are advocating for, it is going to garner attention.
There is another factor in play here. In the two most recent fact-checks of Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez (both after she won the November election), her staff did not respond to an inquiry from Politifact regarding the issue.
The best fact-checking is completely non-partisan, which makes it a nearly impossible task to perform flawlessly. When the standard is what is and isn't newsworthy, that brings subjective judgment into play.
If you go to the Politifact website, there are three headline items. The big one is that outgoing Florida Governor Rick Scott kept 50% of his campaign promises. The two smaller items are showing that Trump's statement about Mexico paying for the wall through the new USCMA trade deal is false, and the other being an analysis of whether or not the House can now force the release of Trump's tax returns.
The extremely high profile of a newly elected member of the U.S. House that Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez enjoys comes with magnifying glass level attention to everything she says and does. She is remarkably adept at dealing with conservative flack, as she demonstrated by dancing in D.C. She deserves the same learning curve every other newly elected member of the House gets. Her approach to acknowledging her mistakes, owning them and moving forward is a very refreshing change from the "deny, deny, lie, lie" mode of the White House.
Was she wrong in her tweet? Yes. Did she admit it? Yes. I'm giving her a pass on this one.
It would be great to have a fact-checking organization that could be relied upon to be non-partisan, and to fact-check many more statements from politicians without regard to their newsworthiness. But that doesn't seem feasible.
As I said in my recent blog about her proposal to raise the top marginal tax rate to 70%, I'm a big fan of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Now the Washington Post has given her a rating of Four Pinocchios for a tweet she made this past Sunday.
$21 TRILLION of Pentagon financial transactions “could not be traced, documented, or explained.”— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) December 2, 2018
$21T in Pentagon accounting errors. Medicare for All costs ~$32T.
That means 66% of Medicare for All could have been funded already by the Pentagon.
And that’s before our premiums. https://t.co/soT6GSmDSG
Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez went on to ask some excellent questions about the fact-checking process.
For example, it looks like @PolitiFact has fact-checked Sarah Huckabee Sanders and myself the *same* amount of times: 6.— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 7, 2019
She’s been serving for almost 2 years. I’ve served 4 days.
Why is she fact-checked so little? Is she adhering to some standard we don’t know about?
Another question for @politifact: some officials’ statements (ex. Andrew Cuomo) get rated “true” frequently.— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 7, 2019
I say true things all the time - I’d hope most do. When does Politifact choose to rate true statements?
Is there a guide? I’d be happy to repost if there is.
Her question where she points out that Politifact has fact-checked her the same number of times it has fact-checked Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a excellent question. Why haven't they fact-checked the statement from Ms Huckabee Sanders regarding 4,000 terrorists entering the U.S. by violating our southern border; a statement which is "pants-on-fire" dishonest?
As to the choices of those engaged in checking fact, regarding which ones they issue ratings on, I go back to an adage from my long-ago days in the news biz. If it bleeds, it leads. The statements that are taken up by fact-checkers are those that are newsworthy, controversial, and/or blatantly wrong.
The tweet from Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez about $21 trillion in Pentagon financial transactions that could not be tracked makes it appear that there was $21 trillion lost by the accountants in that famed five-sided building. That's just wrong. Total spending on defense by the U.S. since 1940 doesn't total $21 trillion. In fact, there isn't missing money, there are improperly labeled accounting entries that don't meet proper auditing standards.
$21 trillion is a huge number. The entire U.S. national debt is currently $21.9 trillion. When you make a sweeping statement about how this pot of missing money could be used to pay for a program you are advocating for, it is going to garner attention.
There is another factor in play here. In the two most recent fact-checks of Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez (both after she won the November election), her staff did not respond to an inquiry from Politifact regarding the issue.
The best fact-checking is completely non-partisan, which makes it a nearly impossible task to perform flawlessly. When the standard is what is and isn't newsworthy, that brings subjective judgment into play.
If you go to the Politifact website, there are three headline items. The big one is that outgoing Florida Governor Rick Scott kept 50% of his campaign promises. The two smaller items are showing that Trump's statement about Mexico paying for the wall through the new USCMA trade deal is false, and the other being an analysis of whether or not the House can now force the release of Trump's tax returns.
The extremely high profile of a newly elected member of the U.S. House that Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez enjoys comes with magnifying glass level attention to everything she says and does. She is remarkably adept at dealing with conservative flack, as she demonstrated by dancing in D.C. She deserves the same learning curve every other newly elected member of the House gets. Her approach to acknowledging her mistakes, owning them and moving forward is a very refreshing change from the "deny, deny, lie, lie" mode of the White House.
Was she wrong in her tweet? Yes. Did she admit it? Yes. I'm giving her a pass on this one.
It would be great to have a fact-checking organization that could be relied upon to be non-partisan, and to fact-check many more statements from politicians without regard to their newsworthiness. But that doesn't seem feasible.
posted by me at 6:47 AM
<< Home