This week, the media claimed that Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) said that fact-checking is a form of censorship.
Here’s what he said:
“When I use the word ‘censor’ here, I’m meaning blocked content, fact check, or labeled content, or demonetized websites of conservative, Republican, or pro-life individuals or groups or companies.”
So, technically he did say that “fact check” is synonymous with the word “censor”. And, of course, the Liberals all went nuts. But to understand what he was trying to communicate we need to dig a little deeper.
If the label “fact check” could be taken literally, then the Left would have a point and Senator Lee would look a little paranoid. But, in the world we live in today, “fact checking” doesn’t always mean “checking for facts”. “Fact checking” is often used as a political tool to cast doubt on a particular point of view while silently promoting the opposing stance.
Conservatives are, indeed, “fact checked” at a rate higher than Liberals. The exact numbers aren’t available, but you can see this for yourself. You only need to spend a few minutes on Facebook or Twitter to see that this is true.
Statements that are “fact checked” are often evaluated out of context (like Senator Lee), then labeled as false or misleading. There are numerous examples of a reviewer misquoting what was said and then branding the article as false based on the misquoted claim.
“Fact Checking” is done by for-profit companies, often funded by Facebook, Twitter, etc. So, while at a glance it may appear that the “fact checkers” are disinterested third parties, oftentimes they’re not.
There is no law saying that “fact checkers” need to be honest. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that lying is constitutionally protected. Other than wanting to be a member in good standing with the “International Fact-Checking Network” (an association invented by the Poynter group), there is nothing motivating a “fact checker” to be truthful.
If you want a “fact check” to have any merit, here is a short list of things you can’t do:
- You can’t only fact check articles that support a particular point of view. Fact checking must be equally applied to all viewpoints.
- You can’t ignore the context of the statement. Considering a verbatim quote without considering the context is potentially misleading.
- You can’t just call an accused person and ask them if they committed the crime. Then, if they deny it, call the claim “false”. For example, just because the Ilhan Omar campaign denied harvesting ballots, it doesn’t mean that they didn’t actually harvest ballots.
- You can’t just Google other articles and pick the one that supposedly proves the claim is “false”.
- You can’t fabricate statements that weren’t in the original post, video, etc. and then label something as “false” because those made-up statements aren’t true. Here’s an example of that in action.
- You can’t have the fox guard the henhouse. Using mainstream media sources such as MSNBC, CNN or USA Today as “fact checkers” is ridiculous because mainstream media is the biggest proliferator of false information.
It requires research to accurately fact check something. Fact checking requires real, boots on the ground investigative journalism, not just some half-assed Internet search. It requires that the truth be searched for without bias and without regard or concern for what the truth may be. And, it requires that the fact checkers don’t discriminate against, or show support for, either side of an issue.
If you look at what Senator Lee was trying to communicate instead of taking his words literally, he makes a valid point. Because “fact checking” often doesn’t mean “checking for facts”. He is completely justified in his concern that censorship is being performed under the pretense of searching for the truth.
Related Articles:
Partly Sunny
