The Epistemology of Fact Checking

Fact checking has become a prominent facet of political news coverage, but it employs a variety of objectionable methodological practices, such as treating a statement containing multiple facts as if it were a single fact and categorizing as accurate or inaccurate predictions of events yet to occur....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inCritical review (New York, N.Y.) Vol. 25; no. 2; pp. 162 - 180
Main Authors Uscinski, Joseph E., Butler, Ryden W.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Routledge 01.06.2013
Subjects
Conflict
Debate
Epistemology
Journalism
Media coverage
News
News Coverage
Political philosophy
Politicians
Prediction
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Fact checking has become a prominent facet of political news coverage, but it employs a variety of objectionable methodological practices, such as treating a statement containing multiple facts as if it were a single fact and categorizing as accurate or inaccurate predictions of events yet to occur. These practices share the tacit presupposition that there cannot be genuine political debate about facts, because facts are unambiguous and not subject to interpretation. Therefore, when the black-and-white facts-as they appear to the fact checkers-conflict with the claims produced by politicians, the fact checkers are able to see only (to one degree or another) "lies." The examples of dubious fact-checking practices that we discuss show the untenability of the naïve political epistemology at work in the fact-checking branch of journalism. They may also call into question the same epistemology in journalism at large, and in politics.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:0891-3811
1933-8007
DOI:10.1080/08913811.2013.843872