Tales from the Evil Empire

If you like factcheck.org you will absolutely love

http://vote-smart.org

I have yet to find a better site to find out what a politician really is about, not base on his latest sound bytes, but on his voting record, and ratings from interest groups.

The *best* place to get facts is fox news................................. LOL! i'm sorry, i couldn't help myself with that joke.

factcheck.org rocks.

FSM = Flying Spaghetti Monster?

I pick on their records, not on the personality cult.  Reality is that most people in the US ignore the media and go by sound judgement.

I prefer to keep my money in my own wallet regardless of the websites I visit  ;)

One of the saddest things is that young people go to The Daily Show not recognizing that the slanted parody they dish out is hardly news.

I think you need to get your own facts checked.  The name "Factcheck.org" is a lie in itself, because it is a completely slanted liberal site that supports of the hard-left Barack Obama.

I will not attempt to set any points straight here, and frankly doubt that this comment will even be published on your blog, because the liberal hatred is so strong right now, and that hatred drives away any sense of logic and common sense.

It's amazing to me that people who are obviously so bright when it comes to technology are so completely without a clue when it comes to real-world events.

Bertrand,

I never said they are stupid; I would say that they are ill-informed.  I have two sons in their 20's - both them tell me about how many of the people they know who think they are getting a balanced view of the news from Jon Stewart and make no effort to check multiple sources and and weigh the information in an attempt to filter out bias.  It's not an easy task and few people make the effort.

From my perspective, it seems factcheck.org is trying to do the right thing.  It also seems to me that those 'fake news' shows are a catalyst for so many of those mud-slinging ads you speak of.

Lets be honest now, a much better source of information?  I enjoy the shows but can see them for what they are..(entertainment)..surely you can as well?

I've got a buddy that writes for Colbert.  He understands what they are doing quite well. (will submit credentials upon request)

I love FactCheck.org and similar sites.  And I am a big fan of The Daily Show and Colbert too.

BUT, if you really want a good source of news, turn off the cable networks and tune your radio to NPR, National Public Radio.  On NPR, you don't get quick sound bites.  You get long, in depth stories that get down to the details.  No flashy intros, sound effects and graphics.  Just good old fashioned journalism - the way it is supposed to be.

@Andy - NPR is good old fashioned journalism? You must be joking.  Yeah, their stories are longer than the 30 second blips you see on the 4 majors but that doesn't make them unbiased. Over the decades I have learned that the best way to know the truth is to pay attention to what is said and what is NOT said.  Too often I hear only 1 side of stories from NPR.  Even when they do give both sides they do so only half-heartedly.  In addition, most stories have 5,6,7, or even 11 different angles and sides but they only report 1 or 2.  Of course, no one reports every side of a story - but please, don't refer to NPR as unbiased old fashioned reporting.

Yes, NPR has a built-in bias.  They receive a lot of their funding from large corporations such as General Electric and Archer-Daniels-Midland, the result of which is you'll never hear a critical word about their large sponsors.  They've been bought off to assure they will NOT SAY anything negative about corn ethanol or nuclear power.  (among others)

@speednet........thats hilarious....factcheck.org is a leftist organization?

Well, reality tends to act that way......

Well...I have to admit, I lean right on some issues, and left on others.  I think personal responsibility needs to have a place in our society.  I still can't bear the farce that is Fox News.  Conservative or liberal doesn't matter with some things--facts is one of them.  How you INTERPRET facts can be dependent on a bias...but what the facts themselves ARE is not.  THAT is why I, even when I'm at (even strong) odds with liberals on the issue being reported, cannot STAND Fox News!

Does anybody remember the 2003 study?  The questions asked were important, but perhaps could have been more neutral (for example, I heard one justification that chemical weapons should count as WMDs, and we KNEW that Iraq had those because the US had previously GIVEN them those!)  Still, the sheer extent was still pretty laughable.  See the .pdf here: www.pipa.org/.../IraqMedia_Oct03_rpt.pdf

Because I wanted to see a poll that used another topic, I was more solidly pleased with drawing an opinion when I saw the 2007 study from Pew Research Center.  While Fox was not the absolute lowest (unsurprisingly, to me at least, that honor goes to the National Enquirer...though I'm a little shocked than anyone is using that as a primary news source to begin with!)  pewresearch.org/.../who-knows-news-what-you-read-or-view-matters-but-not-your-politics

According to the latter, by the way, comedy news parody shows that reference real events (like Colbert Report, for instance) honestly DID have higher rates of viewers knowing the facts tested (House Majority Party, Secretary of State, and Prime Minister of Britain).  And again, NPR ranked very high on the list (2nd overall, behind the New York Times and the Atlantic) for listeners knowing the true facts being asked.

As for a personal opinion, I have found that NPR has different slants on different issues and stories--mostly affected by the views and biases of the experts being interviewed and of the callers-in commenting on the story.  Even when I disagree with the conclusions being drawn by callers or the journalists themselves, I generally feel that I have received a wealth of INFORMATION--information which I am then able to interpret based on my own experiences and opinions...and obtaining information is the primary reason I turn them on in the first place.  They're just as entitled as the next American to hold whatever opinions they want--as long as I get the information from the story, I don't necessarily care what their opinions were when they told it to me.

Do I expect everyone on the street to agree with me on every issue?  Of course not.  Within my friends, family, workplace, etc. I am bound to have disagreements.  We're still civil to each other.  I and my more eccentric extended family members still love each other despite our differences of opinion on VARIOUS issues.  It would be foolish, then, to think that every news reporter, journalist, or radio show host would (or should) agree with me on the issues all (or even most) of the time.  They're entitled to their own opinion.  I'm entitled to mine.  Everyone's biased--human condition.  If your own opinion didn't seem right to you, why would you bother?  So your perspective is altered towards your own opinions.  But as long as the facts of the situation can get into the article or program for me to see, the reporter's opinion just isn't what's important.  As long as the facts and numbers discussed are there and accurate, the reporter or newscaster is doing his/her job, and I am satisfied.  I, the reader/viewer, can then make my own conclusions.  In my opinion, as it should be.