By this point, I guess you can tell I'm ever-so-fixated on how journalists can improve the accuracy of their work and clean up political discourse.
Whether it's the Associated Press editor pushing for "
accountability journalism" or that NPR
segment from last week where they discussed how debunking misinformation merely solidifies the incorrect perception most of the time, the newsmedia implicitly has admitted they need to get more careful.
Today's well-intentioned journalistic initiative to make the campaign trail less cluttered?
The Washington Post's "Fact Checker"
storysection, with the following goal:
The purpose of this website, and an accompanying column in the Post, is to "truth squad" the national political debate in the period leading up to the 2008 presidential election. Our goal is to shed as much light as possible on controversial claims and counter-claims involving important national issues, such as the war in Iraq, immigration, health care, social issues, the economy, and the records of the various presidential candidates. When we come across a statement or claim that is at variance with the facts, as best we can establish them, we will point that out.
While it's clear they're taking their job very seriously, they still keep it readable with features like "
The Pinocchio Test" where they score misstatements or exaggerations on a scale of one to four Pinocchios. (And reward fully truthful statements with the mark of "Geppetto.")
And, unsurprisingly, I'm a fan. Sort of. So far, it looks as if they're getting the hang of things by picking on some political low-hanging fruit.
Read full post…