Skip

just the facts, ma'am.
March 28, 2004 8:07 PM   Subscribe

factcheck.org -- a nonpartisan, nonprofit, "consumer advocate" for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics.
posted by crunchland (11 comments total)

 
This is great, but are they fast enough to counteract 24 hour news cycles? And blogs are doing a pretty good job exposing most of the lies that are being flung all over, continuously.
posted by amberglow at 8:31 PM on March 28, 2004


"This is great, but are they fast enough to counteract 24 hour news cycles?"

Good question. Also, can they appeal to the 24 hour news viewer?
posted by eastlakestandard at 8:54 PM on March 28, 2004


Also see: Spinsanity
posted by gwint at 9:19 PM on March 28, 2004


this is beautiful. I've long hoped that something like this existed, but wasn't aware of a specific example.

As for blogs serving a similar function, blogs are mildly unreliable, usually biased (only interested in debunking on candidate's atttacks or the other), and usually requiring wading through many other topics in order to find this kind of information. This site is a much better alternative it seems.
posted by Wingy at 10:02 PM on March 28, 2004


thanks, great link....though now i'm truly depressed at my choice of either Kang or Kodos
posted by NGnerd at 10:09 PM on March 28, 2004


I can't be the only one who read that as "fatcheck.org". Just saying, it would have been nice.
posted by fvw at 11:03 PM on March 28, 2004


I've also found the Columbia Journalism Review's Campaign Desk to be of interest this political season. While they do post investigations of "facts" similar to the Annenberg Center linked above, because of their home at Columbia they tend to do so from the perspective of journalism and the media's responsiblity to the public.
posted by JollyWanker at 5:16 AM on March 29, 2004


Saw the factcheck.org site after hearing it mentioned on NOW with Bill Moyers a few months ago.

I think the best way to really achieve total fact checking thoroughness, for TV, would be to make all the applicable shows with some kinda Pop-Up video notes to quickly state the truth.

I think that would be a cool method.

Of course there could be subsequent programs that counter with their own pop-ups and something akin to a grafitti cross-out war would begin....

In addition:
-----------------------------------------------------------
I can't be the only one who read that as "fatcheck.org".

I thought that was the latest GLOBE magazine with Kirstie Allie on the cover.

( aside - how long it has been since the Kobiyashi Marue)
posted by RubberHen at 5:52 AM on March 29, 2004


We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.

Man are these guys dead.
posted by a3matrix at 6:00 AM on March 29, 2004


You know, this is the kind of thing Ralph Nader used to do.
posted by eatitlive at 9:29 AM on March 29, 2004


This goes on every week with FAIR and their counterspin radio program, now on zero commercial stations!

The problem isn't getting the information out, the problem is getting people interested in media criticism and corrections. It seems many are happy to sit back buying the comforting lies that fit in with their assumptions and not deal with the cognitive dissonance of "The President of the United State lied?"

Granted, corporate media could reform itself, but why? It has a nice, cozy, and highly profitable position playing what best can be described as Pravda on the Potomac.

So its a chicken and egg problem. Will sites like this make people interested and critical of media or will media have to push criticism first?
posted by skallas at 11:42 PM on March 29, 2004


« Older Great American Songwriters   |   California Doesn't Even Have... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post