Is PolitiFact Biased? You decide!

[Themius]

Its being dishonest though. Its dishonest of Obama to say that, and its dishonest of PF to call it mostly true. Putting an asterisk at the end doesn't really mean anything.

- - - Updated - - -



Well, coal does technically make more jobs. Shouldn't that be a mostly true statement, according to Politifact?

The creating more jobs is an add on as a way to get people behind coal. It's not healthy...

[Venant]

The creating more jobs is an add on as a way to get people behind coal. It's not healthy...

Have you ever stopped to question how 'green' it really is to manufacture solar panels in China and then ship them on a super cargo ship across the Pacific ocean? Did you know that a single one of those super cargo ships can generate pollution equivalent to 50 million cars because of the nature of the fuel they burn?

So if we simply consumed less and cut imports from China, we could easily reduce emissions by multiple times the emissions rate of every car on the road in the US.

[Cthulhu 2020]

And yet they don't follow their own methodology, only a fool would think they do.

They don't? They rate a lot of Democrat stuff as mostly True but then clarify.

You guys like to cry about how the 77 cents on the dollar thing is false, but politifact says it's mostly true... which it is.

But they then go on to clarify that the 77 cents on the dollar figure is from ALL job sources, and does not compare equal positions. It does this same explanation process for a lot of things.

And of course, Republicans believe that man made climate change is a hoax, even now that the fossil fuel companies say it is not. American conservatives are one of the few groups left in this world that still deny it, and they believe politifact wrong to say that it is in fact truth. So there's that kind of thing, where Republicans are just straight up wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

I've done that six times this thread, feel free to go back and look for yourself.

Humor me and link it again, with your own explanation and words. I'm willing to engage with someone that does not stoop to personal insults.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, of course they're biased. It's nearly impossible for human beings to remove themselves of all existing bias.

However, I think they do an excellent job trying as hard as possible to remove their bias from each ruling. Their articles are filled with sources, and they will often amend their ruling if new information comes to light.

I do not believe they that they give preferential treatment to either Republicans or Democrats.

I mean does anyone remember the 2013 Lie of the Year? "If you like your health care plan, you can keep it" - Obama

Or that some of Hillary's claims are rated as false or pants on fire, or flip flip. They rated several of her statements about the email as pants on fire.

Conservatives do love to link those and use them as proof. They just never like it when it's used against them.

[zenkai]

They don't? They rate a lot of Democrat stuff as mostly True but then clarify.

You guys like to cry about how the 77 cents on the dollar thing is false, but politifact says it's mostly true... which it is.

But they then go on to clarify that the 77 cents on the dollar figure is from ALL job sources, and does not compare equal positions. It does this same explanation process for a lot of things.

And of course, Republicans believe that man made climate change is a hoax, even now that the fossil fuel companies say it is not. American conservatives are one of the few groups left in this world that still deny it, and they believe politifact wrong to say that it is in fact truth. So there's that kind of thing, where Republicans are just straight up wrong.

- - - Updated - - -



Humor me and link it again, with your own explanation and words. I'm willing to engage with someone that does not stoop to personal insults.

It's based on flawed methodology. It's not True, it's a very false narrative that paints a false picture. Then you go on ranting about climate change and republicans like I give a shit, the examples posted had 0 to do with climate change, you invent your own arguments so you can win against them.

[Aggrophobic]

Maybe because they are owned by a paper that endorsed Clinton this year.

Or they are simply wrong more often.

[NineSpine]

It's based on flawed methodology. It's not True, it's a very false narrative that paints a false picture. Then you go on ranting about climate change and republicans like I give a shit, the examples posted had 0 to do with climate change, you invent your own arguments so you can win against them.

The 77 cents figure is fact. Plain and simple. What is wrong is when people misrepresent that fact by pretending it means "for the same work" or something like that. This is why you have such a problem with politifact: You don't seem to understand the difference between a fact and a misuse of that fact. If someone uses a fact to be misleading, the fact doesn't become untrue.

[zenkai]

The 77 cents figure is fact. Plain and simple. What is wrong is when people misrepresent that fact by pretending it means "for the same work" or something like that. This is why you have such a problem with politifact: You don't seem to understand the difference between a fact and a misuse of that fact. If someone uses a fact to be misleading, the fact doesn't become untrue.

Why wasn't it rated as half true

HALF TRUE – The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context.

Because it's out of context, the data is complete garbage it is only to use to make it out as women are making 23% less to their male counter parts in the same field which is complete bullshit. There is 0 reason to ever quote that figure, especially in a political speech if you're not going to paint the true narrative.

[urasim]

The 77 cents figure is fact. Plain and simple. What is wrong is when people misrepresent that fact by pretending it means "for the same work" or something like that. This is why you have such a problem with politifact: You don't seem to understand the difference between a fact and a misuse of that fact. If someone uses a fact to be misleading, the fact doesn't become untrue.

You mean like everyone who uses it? Like Obama? When you say "women earn 77 cents" and then follow it up with "we need to level the playing field" like he did, you're being dishonest about the figure to push an agenda.

He said "over the course of her career a working women with a college degree will earn on average hundreds of thousands of dollars less than a man who does the same work. Now that's wrong".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WWzELjRfWA

You're being dishonest. Lying like he is.

[NineSpine]

Why wasn't it rated as half true

HALF TRUE – The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context.

Because it's out of context, the data is complete garbage it is only to use to make it out as women are making 23% less to their male counter parts in the same field which is complete bullshit. There is 0 reason to ever quote that figure, especially in a political speech if you're not going to paint the true narrative.

Did Obama say "A woman makes 23% less than their male counterpart in the same field?" Nope, he didn't.

- - - Updated - - -

You mean like everyone who uses it? Like Obama? When you say "women earn 77 cents" and then follow it up with "we need to level the playing field" like he did, you're being dishonest about the figure to push an agenda.

He said "over the course of her career a working women with a college degree will earn on average hundreds of thousands of dollars less than a man who does the same work. Now that's wrong".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WWzELjRfWA

You're being dishonest. Lying like he is.

Right, but when an Obama ad took it too far and said that the 77% figure was for equal work, guess what? It was rated Mostly False:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...7-cents-dolla/

[Mormolyce]

Maybe it's just that Republicans repeat more falsehoods.

Admittedly their average is massively skewed by Trump :P

Not really.

I'm not a Republican or a conservative but this is pretty egregious reporting.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...icide-victims/

Trump tweets that blacks kill 81% of white homicide victims, whereas it's more like 81% of whites are NOT killed by blacks. What's your issue with that? Straight up pants on fire.

[LilSaihah]

Trump tweets that blacks kill 81% of white homicide victims, whereas it's more like 81% of whites are NOT killed by blacks. What's your issue with that? Straight up pants on fire.

Blacks kill 19% of all white people omg

[zenkai]

Did Obama say "A woman makes 23% less than their male counterpart in the same field?" Nope, he didn't.

- - - Updated - - -



Right, but when an Obama ad took it too far and said that the 77% figure was for equal work, guess what? It was rated Mostly False:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...7-cents-dolla/

actually he did?

You mean like everyone who uses it? Like Obama? When you say "women earn 77 cents" and then follow it up with "we need to level the playing field" like he did, you're being dishonest about the figure to push an agenda.

He said "over the course of her career a working women with a college degree will earn on average hundreds of thousands of dollars less than a man who does the same work. Now that's wrong".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WWzELjRfWA

You're being dishonest. Lying like he is.

[NineSpine]

actually he did?

Wait, maybe the issue here is that you just plain don't understand how Politifact works. Why are you expecting a statement from his State of the Union is 2014 to be rated false because of something he said in a different place in 2013?

[Macaquerie]

The 77 cents figure is fact. Plain and simple. What is wrong is when people misrepresent that fact by pretending it means "for the same work" or something like that. This is why you have such a problem with politifact: You don't seem to understand the difference between a fact and a misuse of that fact. If someone uses a fact to be misleading, the fact doesn't become untrue.

In terms of the wage gap though, people do have a tendency to frame it in a way that makes it seem more egregious than it is without actually stating anything false.

e.g. Did you know women earn less than men in America for doing the exact same work? Studies show that women earn only 77 cents for every dollar that men are paid!

Now neither of those statements would be false on their own, but taken together they create the impression, intentionally or not, that women earn 77 cents for the same work which would be a false statement.

[NineSpine]

In terms of the wage gap though, people do have a tendency to frame it in a way that makes it seem more egregious than it is without actually stating anything false.

e.g. Did you know women earn less than men in America for doing the exact same work? Studies show that women earn only 77 cents for every dollar that men are paid!

Now neither of those statements would be false on their own, but taken together they create the impression, intentionally or not, that women earn 77 cents for the same work which would be a false statement.

Do you know what else says that? He politifact article we are taking about.

[fengosa]

In the primaries Jeb Bush and Rubio had similar ratings to Clinton and Sanders. It's the alt-right crowd that tends to get called out for making things up. Trump,Cruz, Bachman etc don't deserve the benefit of the doubt and that gets reflected in their score.

It's hard to blame politifact for that, they're just telling it like it is.

[Deletedaccount1]

I just logged in after 5 hours and saw 9 notifications in this one thread. I'm going to go pleasure myself and finish Ghostbusters and then maybe I will respond to some of you tomorrow if I'm not too preoccupied being the smartest person on planet Earth.

[Mormolyce]

Democrats lie through their teeth on economic issues because they rely heavily on blaming neoliberalism for economic problems while supporting blind Keynesian solutions.

Good luck proving anything is a truth or a lie in economics. So far the actual field of economics has failed to do so.

I mean except the Austrian school, that's straight up hocus pocus.

[Dezerte]

Probably. Reality itself seems to have a bias sometimes as well. There's usually a "hidden" truth though.

[Aucald]

If I recall correctly PolitiFact has been vetted many times, and the essential outcome is that it is "free" of malicious bias but possibly tainted by soft or institutional bias (arising from externalized factors beyond the control of an aggregated source). Nothing is completely and 100% free of bias - the very act of recording information can add a slant that is nigh subliminal but still effectively alters the neutral state of the information. Since the articles are sourced and reviewable, I'd give it a pass - you are free to review the information that led to their rating and make your own determinations.