Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Fact-Checkers Not Necessarily Neutral- says Marvin Olasky

So you think you can trust the fact checkers, the ones that the news outlets inevitably consult to fact check our politicians statements? The ones that are supposedly neutral and non-partisan. According to Townhall's Marvin Olasky, that 'aint necessarily so.

The problem is that, The Fact Checker, and a host of others that hand out “Four Pinocchios” or “Pants on Fire” awards have very long noses and very burnt buttocks. They are partisans posing as neutralists.

For example, on this work/welfare question, here’s the big fact the fact-checkers missed: The Obama administration will let liberal state welfare officials water down work requirements as long as they game the system to show a pretend movement from welfare to work.
Fact-checkers concluded that Obama was not weakening the work requirement because states to gain flexibility would have to increase the number of people going from welfare to work by 20 percent. But states can do that by keeping better records of job attainment and by enticing more people to go onto welfare, which will boost the number of those leaving it. And if those two approaches don’t work, never fear: States do not need to meet the 20 percent standard, but merely “demonstrate clear progress toward the goal.”

Read the rest here.

Looks like we need fact checkers for the fact checkers.

No comments: