I've seen this numerous times. Some fact checker will say that something is "mostly false" (or worse) and then, if you actually read the explanation, they will basically agree with the fact but use some kind of twisted logic to ultimately try to convince you that the truth is not the truth.
The examples I've seen of this are almost always related to Trump in some way. The latest example had to do with a claim that increased immigration drives up housing prices. Now this is a pretty simple claim. It doesn't matter where you stand on the immigration issue, the claim that increased immigration drives up housing prices is either true or it is not.
Basically, on October 2nd, Elon Music retweeted (re-Xed?) a post by JD Vance that claimed increased immigration drives up housing prices. PolitiFact "fact checked" this statement and came to the conclusion that it was "mostly false". However, if you bother to read their explanation, they go on to agree that increased immigration puts an increased demand on limited housing. Econ 101 says this drives up prices. Their reasoning for rating the claim as "mostly false" is because they say it isn't the primary reason housing prices are rising. While I absolutely agree with that, that isn't what Vance said. He said it caused increased prices, not that it was the only or primary cause. So taking the statement at face value, it is 100% true. Yet PolitiFact's conclusion is "mostly false".
This is not an isolated instance of their tortured reasoning. I mean you could make a living fact checking the fact checkers. How is anyone taking them seriously? They are like a reverse Obi-Wan Kenobi. Everything Trump says is false...from a certain point of view.
If Facebook and other social media sites are serious about eliminating fake news (and personally, I think they should support free speech and resist that kind of censorship), then they need to ban organizations like PolitiFact.
Follow