Bloggers have performed an invaluable function since their emergence in the media world a few years ago. Whether it is uncovering the forgery of the RatherGate documents, the fauxtography that is propaganda in the service of terrorists, revealing and publicizing the odious practice of earmarks, the bias that has corrupted the media-the quest for truth is what has driven the best of the bloggers.
Now the Washington Post joins the campaign: today the paper starts a new feature-The FactChecker, which will be focused on examining the veracity of claims made by politicians. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery as the opprobrium formerly heaped on the new media practitioners (clad in pajamas, hairy knuckles, anti-social nerds, zealots-take your pick) is transformed into unintended praise.
A good first step. Let’s hope there are similar plans in the works for examining the veracity of claims made by columnists and reporters.
Sounds great with one caveat:
so long as the facts they decide to check aren’t biased to one political party.
Will we be seeing only Republican politicians being scrutinized?
It’s interesting, but the blogosphere wouldn’t put up with someone commenting and saying ‘an anonymous source told me’.
And, because the blogosphere rests within an open and interactive communication system, any errors of fact and even opinion, are rapidly picked up and flung back at the poster. The system is self-organized to almost automatically self-correct.
The print MSM doesn’t yet realize this, I think, and is simply using the internet as a means of expanding its current unlinear infrastructure. Doesn’t work that way.
This is doomed to failure, if wikipedia can’t promise accuracy how is this contrived MSM gimmick going to get us to the truth. Who decides it? They’d be better off asking a dozen volunteers from the public to debate and fact check their stories in real time comments and links. I can see the moonbat brigade ruining this quickly.
Face it, the agenda driven print slobs would be out of business if they ever really let us have a go at them on their turf. Transparency isn’t in their best interest.
…as my grandma used to say “the truth will always come out”.
Seems the blogsphere is it is at, thousands of eyes watching out for it.
Woe is us when Big Brother shuts this down or heavily regulates it.
Don’t think so, watch China, Microsoft, and Google – test runs.
Blog might have to be hosted on small South Pacific islands…
I’m with you Kate. Why did we assume (at one time) that there were ‘fact-checkers’ in place? Too many assume that still.
Spelled: ass-u-me
I wish reporters, talking heads, anchors etc were vetted just like a politician is. How many did things in their youth that would sink a politician. How many are involved with other women/men, divorced and other activities. How many have moved their foot/feet in a bathroom stall. If they have these secrets, and think they have overcome them, and become upstanding citizens, why can’t politicians.
“Now the Washington Post joins the campaign: today the paper starts a new feature-The FactChecker, which will be focused on examining the veracity of claims made by politicians.”
Geez, once the MSM gets into blogging about veracity – well there goes the “neighbourhood!”
Re: Washington Post’s fact checker. Nothing new there. My ancestors from France had a similar system. They called it the Guillotine!! Great invention. Unfortunateley, the inventor let it get to his head!
Johnny: “Unfortunateley, the inventor let it get to his head!”
GROAN!
Would they cut of their noses to spite their face?
While it sounds laudable ……. I’m betting that this a) Does not produce any positive results AND b) will be dropped as soon as it looks like their favorite liberals are looking to be the victims of such integrity in reporting.
Hasn’t the CBC done this for a while and just brought its usual bias to the “facts”?
OMMAG nails it. Expect WaPo’s experiment in transparency to fold like a cheap suit when their liberal drivel gets gutted 24/7 by a bunch of nobodies.
Democracy and the MSM are incompatible.