Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Liberal PACs attack FactCheck (again)
FactCheck is starting to get into close contact with few liberal PAC's now. MoveOn has attacked them (see earlier posts: 1, 2) after their claims had been analyzed and found to be not true. Now another liberal PAC, Campaign for America's Future, has received criticism in this paper, from the policy research institute The Annenberg Center at University of Pennsylvania.
They use the same counter-attack measures as many other organisations - they try to create convincing rebuttals. Which of course only provokes FactCheck to prove them wrong once more. (Getting beaten once is bad. Getting beaten twice and humiliated at the same time is just plain stupid.)
Two problems here - Nobody knows what the F-CK CFAF is. Everybody knows what Factcheck.org is, after being the big name of a Cheney mishap during the Vice Presidential Debate 2004. And second - a rebuttal is only efficient if the credibility of your opponent can be questioned. So what's the strategy, you might ask? Quite possibly to lower the credibility of FactCheck over time by issuing a number of rebuttals from many liberal PACs.
It will probably be hard for The Annenberg Center too keep answering all their leftist critics and this is just what the Dem-PACs want - in a world where news travels fast, voters forget just as fast and any rebuttal is as good as the next one it will be hard for any policy science watchdog center to keep up with campaign tactics from partisan groups. Truth is in fact, if we allow ourselves to play spinnng-Einstein with politics, just relative.
They use the same counter-attack measures as many other organisations - they try to create convincing rebuttals. Which of course only provokes FactCheck to prove them wrong once more. (Getting beaten once is bad. Getting beaten twice and humiliated at the same time is just plain stupid.)
Two problems here - Nobody knows what the F-CK CFAF is. Everybody knows what Factcheck.org is, after being the big name of a Cheney mishap during the Vice Presidential Debate 2004. And second - a rebuttal is only efficient if the credibility of your opponent can be questioned. So what's the strategy, you might ask? Quite possibly to lower the credibility of FactCheck over time by issuing a number of rebuttals from many liberal PACs.
It will probably be hard for The Annenberg Center too keep answering all their leftist critics and this is just what the Dem-PACs want - in a world where news travels fast, voters forget just as fast and any rebuttal is as good as the next one it will be hard for any policy science watchdog center to keep up with campaign tactics from partisan groups. Truth is in fact, if we allow ourselves to play spinnng-Einstein with politics, just relative.
