Their commitment is to appearance, not reality

Another reveal about the unreliability of mainsteram media fact checkers. From A Tale of Two Fact Checks by Bill Zeiser.

Also problematic are some of the processes used by the fact checkers. PolitiFact, one of the most respected outfits in the field, uses a scale to rate truthfulness that even the organization’s founder admits is purely subjective. Since the methodology is treated by the fact checkers as propriety information, this leaves the reader wondering what standards the fact checkers use when rendering their verdicts. Why are we told that a simple truth requires more context? What moves the lever between “half true” and “mostly false”? These would be merely philosophical questions if not for the awesome power fact checkers hold over information sharing.

There are a couple of interesting examples in the article of the inconsistency and lack of rigor in the fact-checking process.

The bane of our age is to mistake intentions and representations as reality. For many in the media, it is sufficient to go through the motions of fact-checking without ever engaging with the epistemic process of understanding what a real exercise in fact-checking might look like. The appearance is sufficient.

My past commentary on this issue: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - Fact checking the fact checkers, As is, though, it is simply more fake news, Deceit, misdirection, and obfuscation, Lies, opinions, probabilities and the 2016 election
.