The #Truth2020 Fact Checker Is Here!
We believe a critical part of the #Truth2020 movement is the practice of fact checking. That is, analyzing statements that have been made by political candidates, or those around them, and gauging them as to whether or not they are true (and how much).
There are many organizations that have dedicated themselves entirely to this activity. Others, news outlets like CNN and The Washington Post, have dedicated an entire section of their publications to this specific activity.
The Hard Facts
As important as fact checking is, it's not the be-all end-all solution for truth in politics. There are several forces at work here.
First, there are too many facts to check. The site Snopes.com canceled a partnership with Facebook surprisingly on the basis that there is simply no way for their team to keep up with the number of facts (and fake news posts) that are spread on that site.
Second, there are too many facts to read. Or, rather, there's too much information to read as it is. Fact checking is generally performed as an "add-on", or an extra layer to information that's already out there. It's a reactive activity, and so us citizens must either go out of our way to look for checks on specific facts, or hope that they'll appear in our social media feeds as part of the original discussion.
Finally, even fact checking is biased! How can that be? Facts are facts, right? As with the news, the most reputable organizations go out of their way to maintain an objective and neutral stance. However, also like the news, there is a subjective editorial choice as to which facts deserve to be checked, and to be promoted into your news feeds. Furthermore, fact checking involves careful decisions as to how much time to spend on verifying each fact, which sources to trust in the process of that verification, and, finally, what conclusion to draw as to whether or not something is really true. Most fact-checking organizations have some kind of sliding scale to rate the veracity of a statement, which in the end is also a subjective choice.
The fact is that each reader has to determine for themselves just how much they wish to trust the fact-checking sites themselves. There are sites that are dedicated to the meta-task of evaluating the bias and trustworthiness of the news and fact-checking orgs, but those, too, can be subject to accusation. Predictably, there are efforts out there to fact check the fact-checkers they accuse of bias.
Check It Out
So how do we keep from falling down the rabbit hole of infinite fact checking and doubt? Until there's a better solution, we think that the best approach is to straddle the gap, with a foot firmly planted on either side. In other words, to reduce the bias by finding a way to aggregate the fact checking from multiple sources on any given question.
― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland
A member of the Skeptics Guide to the Universe community (who was happy to give this to the world in anonymity) recently showed me a tool they had built using the Google Custom Search Engine. It’s a quick and easy way to run a search across multiple fact-checking sites, while avoiding opinion columns and more biased forms of media.
While this contributor's tool is excellent, we decided to make our own in order to evolve it as we go. This will allow us to add less well-known sites as we discover them, remove ones that have strayed from our purpose, and to also keep the fact-checking as centered on the U.S. 2020 elections as possible.
Presenting: The #Truth2020 Fact Checker!
Principles
This begs the question: What are the guidelines we're using to choose our fact checking sources? Below is a list of our initial principles and goals, but as they evolve, we'll post updates here and on Twitter.
- Just the facts: The search should only provide results from fact checking and fact-based sites. Sites that return more opinion or rhetoric than facts will be removed.
- #Truth2020-centric: Focus on the United States 2020 national elections
- Diversity: Until we have a definitive source for truth, the best substitute is to have a diversity of sources, from a broad range of political bias
- Accuracy: Avoid sources that have shown a track record of being unreliable or inaccurate. As a starting point, we will be using the Media Bias/Fact Check site as a guide.
- Transparency and openness: We will publish the current list of sources for our search tool on the official site. We are open to recommendations to improve are list, as long as they fit within the guidelines above.
Meeting the Facts Where They Are
With this tool, we don't have to wait for the fact checkers to go the last mile and bring you their facts. We will be following the major figures in the 2020 elections and posting links to fact check searches that we find relevant to the topics at hand.
If you wish to see these results, be sure to follow our Twitter account! Of course, as with fact checking itself, there's too much for any one organization to handle. Feel free to help out with the effort by posting your own searches (or by sending us your suggested search phrases).
Join the #Truth2020 movement!
- Check out TheTruth2020.org
- Follow us on Twitter
- Join our Slack team
- Or just do your best to have constructive discussions online. Don’t forget to use the #Truth2020 hashtag!
