Misadventures in Fact Checking

HayJenn

Moderator
Jul 2014
67,639
56,717
CA
What I find interesting about this thread, is that apparently no Conservative outlet (like Breitbart of the Federalist) is ever mentioned here

And they have both made a lot of mistakes when it comes to "facts"
 

kmiller1610

Former Staff
Mar 2007
32,540
6,421
We've already gone over this. It's nuanced but even righties can get it if they try.

While PP doesn't do actual mammograms, they do breast examinations. Stay with me here, you'll get it. Doing a breast examination means that they screen for breast cancer. If it is found that a patient has a suspicious lump(s), she will be referred for a mammogram. This is why it is rated half true.

The concept isn't that difficult. If one applies him/ herself, the idea can be understood.

It would help if some of you would at least try to be unbiased when it comes to PP.
So does the national cancer whatever recommend mammograms or breast exams by people who don't do mammograms?

Seems to me any woman can look for lumps. But they SHOULD get a mammogram, so isn't the opinion of an under-qualified hack organization like PP more of a danger to women than self examination?
 

kmiller1610

Former Staff
Mar 2007
32,540
6,421
What I find interesting about this thread, is that apparently no Conservative outlet (like Breitbart of the Federalist) is ever mentioned here

And they have both made a lot of mistakes when it comes to "facts"
Tons of examples of both sides of the aisle doing false fact checking in The Smear.

There is an entire section on fact checking outlets.

The Smear
 

HayJenn

Moderator
Jul 2014
67,639
56,717
CA
So does the national cancer whatever recommend mammograms or breast exams by people who don't do mammograms?

Seems to me any woman can look for lumps. But they SHOULD get a mammogram, so isn't the opinion of an under-qualified hack organization like PP more of a danger to women than self examination?
They recommend a self-breast check for every woman under the age of 45 (unless the women have a history of breast cancer in her family). After that, they recommend both. Maybe you don't understand that lot of PP's in areas where there are not a lot of ob/gyn's and therefore they use PP? Why you call them a hack organization is beyond me. They literally help so many people in this country.
 
Likes: Babba
Jan 2019
61
32
Portland, OR
A clearinghouse thread for instances of so called fact checkers engaging in inaccurate and biased reporting. Because let's face it, they aren't neutral judges. They're spin machines.

First up. Note to AP, an economic goal is not a "fact".

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/802b...-check-bushs-economic-growth-goal-unrealistic

And not only that, it's not like we haven't had stretches of growth like that under Reagan and Clinton.
They are only human, and certainly not as accurate as Elizabeth Warren, Alexandria Cortez, or Bernie Sanders but they are far better than the right-wing and I enjoy watching them take apart literally every lie Trump says.
 

kmiller1610

Former Staff
Mar 2007
32,540
6,421
Attkison is wack job - which explains a lot of what you post.
You are misinformed. And you obviously understand the basic rule of the Smear. Smear whomever you disagree with.

But since you seem to want to get spanked with the truth.... These events were all reported and documented by Atkisson in The Smear.

These quotes are from my thread on The Smear

Atkkisson documents examples of smear artists from both sides of the aisle. While discussing Hillary Clinton's " vast right wing conspiracy" against her husband and she does point to Richard Mellon Scaife and The American Spectator whose work as smear artist began before Clinton took office.
The Arkansas Project Unmasked - The Texas Observer

longtime Clinton adversaries from Arkansas and elsewhere: an angry gallery of defeated politicians, disappointed office seekers, right-wing pamphleteers, wealthy eccentrics, zany private detectives, religious fanatics, and die-hard segregationists…. Indeed, the effort to destroy Clinton began early on in the highest councils of the Republican National Committee, and included aides to former president George Bush. Arguably, not even the chief justice of the United States held himself aloof from the great crusade.

If ever there was a time when the nation needed, and didn’t have, the protection of an alert, fair-minded press, it was in the years when the right-wing was hunting the President. Even at its best, the press would have had its hands full. The hunters were a tough crowd.
"Birth of the Modern Smear" Atkkisson goes all the way back to Hamilton and Jefferson, whom, according to a professor of Journalism at the University of Maryland, wrote anonymously for partisan newspapers and planted salacious sex accusations against each other.
After a detailed report on the efforts of Media Matters, the author reports on the swiftboating smear against Kerry. As with most smears, there was some truth in the accusations, but this was an orchestrated smear. As I have been suspecting, if a smear campaign works, both sides of the aisle will employ such campaigns. This is not a partisan issue. In preparing for the writing of the book Atkkisson interviewed dozens of smear artists and found many who work for hire, with no allegiance to any political viewpoint.

The Sleuth - John Kerry's Vietnam Crew Mates Still Fighting Swift Boating
In the chapter on the disloyal opposition, Atkkison documents multiple examples of audience stacking.

Like many other techniques used by the hidden, privately funded, fake news, smear based, unreality fired alternate realities, astroturf slinging bullshit artists that are out there, both parties were doing it in 2016.

Republican Example: South Carolina Debate. Note that Trump won the primary election in South Carolina debate by double digits and took home all the delegates. Trump makes a point and gets soundly booed by the audience. "Trump gets booed" gets printed by multiple MSM outlets. When confronted, the RNC admits that it allocated the audience tickets. Trump supporters couldn't get them. Rence Priebus claims that the 600 tickets were distributed evenly among the 6 candidates at the debate. Atkkisson digs and finds that there were 2,000 seats in the auditorium and also finds these seats were distributed to mostly anti-trump forces. The debate was The Truman Show.
 

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
75,407
65,847
So. Md.
So does the national cancer whatever recommend mammograms or breast exams by people who don't do mammograms?

Seems to me any woman can look for lumps. But they SHOULD get a mammogram, so isn't the opinion of an under-qualified hack organization like PP more of a danger to women than self examination?
Any private practice gynecologist I've been to has done a breast exam on me. My gynecologist refers me for a mammogram. It's exactly the same at PP. Private practice gynecologists don't give mammograms, either. That doesn't mean they don't do breast cancer screenings.

Yes, women can and should look for changes in their breasts but a health professional examination is extremely important. Mammograms are not 100% fool-proof. There are other examinations that are necessary. For example, health professional examine women under their arms and other areas.

Planned Parenthood is a highly rated health organization that employs well qualified health professionals. You neither have knowledge of women's healthcare nor Planned Parenthood. I have much more knowledge than you about both issues. These two issues are subjects that you're not entitled to an opinion on since you have no knowledge of either one.