Conservative frustration with fact-checkers continues to grow after a number of dubious PolitiFact articles, penned in just the last week, sparked outrage from media critics and right-leaning Twitter users.
Since October 1, PolitiFact has released four fact-checks quickly contested by critics, with some doubling-down on claims that fact-checking websites frequently act as shields for the Democratic Party, with partisan intentions.
On Wednesday, PolitiFact’s Warren Fiske rated a claim from Gov. Glenn Youngkin, R-Va., who recently alleged that Democrats "suggested that the [2016] election was stolen."
POLITIFACT RATES YOUNGKIN CLAIM DEMS SUGGESTED 2016 ELECTION WAS STOLEN 'HALF-TRUE'
"People have concerns about the election process and oh by the way, it’s not just Republicans; it’s Democrats. Let’s just remind ourselves that in 2016 Democrats suggested that the election was stolen," the governor reportedly said.
Youngkin’s claim was rated only "half-true" and Fiske shot down the governor’s argument, writing that it was important to note that Democrats did not question the "actual counting" of ballots in 2016, or that Trump had won the election.
Fiske acknowledged that several high-profile Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, had questioned the legitimacy of Trump's win. But, he argued, such skepticism was different from saying the election was actually "stolen."
PolitiFact has previously written that Democrats’ stolen election claims in 2001, 2005, 2016 and 2017 were "mostly symbolic."
Speaking with Fox News Digital, conservative KTTH radio host Jason Rantz pushed back on the idea that PolitFact could even be considered a fact-checking organization, calling them Democratic Party activists who have chosen to weaponize what should be truly objective analysis.
"They routinely ‘fact check’ in bad faith, purposefully taking comments either out of context to make a point or willfully misinterpret comments so that they can rate them false. It's also about their choices on what to fact-check. They will take a meaningless comment from a Democrat to fact check (Joe Biden said his favorite ice cream flavor is vanilla when it's really vanilla bean, so we rate this somewhat false) so they can claim they hold both sides to account," he said.
Rantz also said that PolitiFact is one of the most "transparently partisan" websites available, often used by left-wing media to amplify political propaganda.
On October 5, PolitiFact published two different articles that drew the ire of readers. Ohio Republican Senate nominee JD Vance’s campaign in particular blasted the fact-checking website for commenting on a campaign ad tying his opponent Tim Ryan to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The Vance campaign called the fact-check a "humiliating display of partisanship."
Vance unveiled a new campaign ad last month that showed Ryan, D., telling MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, "I do love her," when asked about Pelosi, adding that he votes with her 100% of the time. PolitiFact, a product of The Poynter Institute, decided to investigate the ad and declared it was only "Half True" because Ryan challenged Pelosi, D-Calif., for the minority leader position in 2016.
One critic called it "truly one of the best / worst examples of PolitiFact picking sides," while radio host Joe Cunningham added, "The ad was entirely accurate, so it’s half-true."
"Politifact is basically a Democrat SuperPac masquerading as below-average journalism. It is obvious that it exists to label as false those claims that are damaging and inconvenient to the left wing cause. A false rating tends to mean ‘True, but said by a Republican,’" Fox News contributor Mollie Hemingway told Fox News Digital.
She added that PolitFact's track record has been "abysmal" and that no one takes them seriously as a fact-checking website any longer.
PolitFact’s managing editor Katie Sanders provided comment to Fox News Digital, stating that the fact-checking website stands by its reporting.
"We stand by our reporting, which relies on independent experts, primary documents and on-the-record information to reach its conclusion. All the sources we use to determine our ratings are made available for the public — and critics — to scrutinize, debate, agree or disagree. In addition, every politician whose claim we fact-check is given the opportunity to contribute evidence to support the claim they made."
Sanders also noted that the six major party nominees for president since 2007 are among the people the site has fact-checked the most. Additionally, Sanders said that reporters for the site are currently being assigned to both Republican and Democratic candidates in key Senate races to cover the midterms. She also provided a link to the process of how PolitiFact decides their Truth-O-Meter ratings and said the site welcomes "thoughtful, evidence-based conversation" about what they publish and the process behind it.
"As for the particular stories you have asked about, the questions raised about them in this query and in similar, choreographed complaints by a small group of partisans, don’t provide any rigorous examples of fact-errors that would merit further response from us. Any pundit at Fox or elsewhere is entitled to disagree with our findings, though we urge detractors to end their continuous personal attacks on journalists, which undermines civil conversation and diminishes any cause for further conversation," she added.
PolitiFact also faced ridicule by social media users on October 5 for claiming that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis was incorrect when he said that Lee County was not inside Hurricane Ian’s forecast cone. The fact-checking site deemed his statement "mostly false" because of a single barrier island, Cayo Costa, belonging to the county inside the storm’s path. Twitter users pointed out that Cayo Costa is largely uninhabited, with less than 20 private residences.
"There is an element of truth in that most of Lee County was not in the forecasted center of the storm 72 hours of landfall; but one of the county's barrier islands was, and focusing on the cone itself downplays the impacts of a storm as large as Ian. We rate his claim Mostly False," PolitFact wrote.
A day earlier, PolitiFact rushed to defend Kamala Harris after the vice president suggested that the disbursement of hurricane relief should be based on "equity."
POLITIFACT RUSHES TO DEFEND HARRIS AFTER VP'S CONTROVERSIAL 'EQUITY' COMMENTS ABOUT HURRICANE RELIEF
"It is our lowest income communities, and our communities of color that are most impacted by these extreme conditions," Harris said, referring to hurricanes Ian and Fiona, on September 30.
"[A]nd so we have to address this in a way that's about giving resources based on equity, understanding we fight for equality, but we also need to find for equity," she added.
PolitiFact wrote that the Vice President had been taken "out-of-context" in clips from the event on social media shared by conservatives. The fact-check specifically called out Florida Sen. Rick Scott's claim that Harris had said "if you have a different skin color, you're going to get relief faster."
"Harris said no such thing in a response to a question that touched on several topics, including Hurricane Ian, climate change policy and disparities in who is most harmed by climate change and extreme weather," PolitiFact wrote.
A recent report from Media Research Center’s NewsBusters, found that during Biden’s first 20 months in office, there were 58 pieces published by PolitiFact to fact-check the president compared to a staggering 338 pieces designed to fact-check Biden critics.
"Overall, there were 5.8 fact checks of Biden critics for every one of the president," NewsBusters executive editor Tim Graham wrote.
The MRC study indicated that Biden’s critics are often given harsh commentary.
"Over his first year and a half, Biden landed on the ‘Mostly False’ or worse side in 28 of 58 fact checks (48 percent). But the ‘Fact Checks About Joe Biden’ were overwhelmingly negative – 298 out of 338 were ‘Mostly False’ or worse (88 percent). There were only three that were ‘True,’ six that were ‘Mostly True’ -- making 9 out of 338 (2.6 percent). Another 31 were ‘Half True,’" Graham wrote. "There were zero ‘Pants on Fire’ rulings about President Biden in his first 20 months. By contrast, Donald Trump has 10 in that time span."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Politifact, a product of The Poynter Institute, uses a "Truth-O-Meter" to determine if claims are "True," "Mostly True," "Half True," "Mostly False," "False" or the dreaded "Pants on Fire." The website insists "fact-checking journalism is the heart of PolitiFact," and claims its "core principles are independence, transparency, fairness, thorough reporting and clear writing."
Fox New’s Kristine Parks and Brian Flood contributed to this report.
