Post by jeffolie on Oct 8, 2013 9:23:30 GMT -6
www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/8d41fa054f4ed1441397967b61c23be546978886/c=0-34-628-504&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/USATODAY/test/2013/10/07/1381186870000-pants-on-fire.jpg
A caveat: the number of PolitiFact ratings of state legislators was tiny. Only 27 legislators were rated, in nine states. Negative ratings such as "half true" or "false" were given to three candidates, or 0.8% who got the fact checking letter (0.8%) compared with 13 candidates, or 1.7%, who didn't.
Since there were likely many more inaccurate statements made by legislators that didn't get reviewed by PolitiFact but could have been influenced by the letter, the potential effect of the fact-checking letter is greater than the study reveals, Nyhan says.
Presidential candidates are relatively impervious to fact-checking, Nyhan says, because the race receives so much news coverage, and the candidates run so many ads, that the fact-checking gets drowned out. State legislators have far fewer chances to get their message out, Nyhan says, so the additional scrutiny of a fact check "might matter more as a result.''
Editors at PolitiFact did not know about the study while it was taking place, but editor Angie Holan says she is not surprised at the results. "Local candidates are very responsive to our questions,'' she says. "Often we'll get local candidates on the phone themselves to respond to our fact checks. We've never gotten a presidential candidate on the phone.''
PolitiFact's goal is not to end inaccuracy in political discourse, just to point it out for voters' information, Holan says. And the site doesn't cover everything politicians say, either in ads or interviews. "We're journalists. We pick statements based on what we think is most newsworthy,'' Holan says. "We fact check things that make people go 'Hmmm, I wonder if that's true.''
www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/10/08/politifact-fact-checking-election-2012/2939559/