Fact-Checking Guests- - Incentives vs. Disincentives

[babylonsister]

:grr:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023416.php


FACT-CHECKING GUESTS -- INCENTIVES VS DISINCENTIVES.... There's been quite a bit of talk of late about the Sunday public-affairs talk shows and the role of fact-checking. The issue was put on the map by NYU professor Jay Rosen, Rosen's ideas were touted by the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz, and ultimately embraced by ABC's Jake Tapper, the temporary host of "This Week."

As the discussion continues, it's worth considering why so many of the programs seem reluctant to incorporate this common-sense approach to quality journalism.

There are five Sunday shows: ABC's "This Week," CBS's "Face the Nation," NBC's "Meet the Press," CNN's "State of the Union," and Fox News' "Fox News Sunday." To date, only "This Week" has adopted Rosen's idea on incorporating fact-checking into the process. "Meet the Press" host David Gregory has said he's content to have viewers "fact-check 'Meet the Press' every week on their own terms," whatever that means. As far as I can tell, Bob Schieffer, Candy Crowley, and Chris Wallace haven't addressed the issue at all, though CBS, to its credit, published a fairly detailed fact-check item online after Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) lied repeatedly during a recent broadcast.

So, why do the shows seem so reluctant to pursue this? It's certainly possible that they don't want to look like "followers" -- ABC is doing it, and if the other shows follow suit, it gives the appearance of trying to play catch-up. Shows generally want to look like trend-setters, not followers.

But Jay Rosen raises a more disconcerting possibility.

The more disturbing possibility is that {David Gregory} thinks Tapper's policy may give Meet the Press a competitive edge in booking guests who won't want to be checked so vigorously. (As opposed to competing with an even better fact check, which would probably cause Bob Schieffer at Face the Nation to adopt the same policy, forcing the guests to accept the new rules or flee to cable, which has a fraction of the viewers.)

Look at it this way: the Washington politician who's been on Meet the Press more than any other is John McCain. On April 6, Politifact's truth-o-meter rated McCain a pants-on-fire liar for claiming that he never called himself a maverick. See what I mean?

I obviously can't speak to the motivations of the shows' producers and hosts. I don't know them and have no idea what they've considered and why.

But Rosen's speculation is hardly unreasonable. If I'm a GOP lawmaker, and I know I'm going to have repeat demonstrably false talking points about the major issues of the day, I'm much more likely to appear on a program that allows me to lie with impunity than one that incorporates fact-checking as an official part of the show.

The shows that count on high-profile guests to generate strong ratings may very well have thought of this, too.

—Steve Benen

[jaxx]

1. OMG what would those people do if they couldn't go on tv and lie?

Now they are given a platform to say whatever they want and are rarely called on it. Fact check them, make them either tell the truth or shut up.

[RandomThoughts]

2. So then why don't shows call out there competitors for lying?

Because there is very little competition.

Why isn't One station or network doing shows showing how there is no fact checking, and how the other stations are allowing people to lie on air to the American people.


Because it is a monopoly system.

Why weren't insurance companies running adds showing the bonuses of competitors?

Why aren't banks running adds showing mismanagement and profit taking at other banks?



A local bank could run an add with 20 seconds showing how Pension funds were done in another bank, then show how they do it.

[babylonsister]

4. abc is doing this by actually fact-checking. If other shows fail to hop

on board, perhaps the theory in the OP is correct.

[HillbillyBob]

3. I have not watched the Sunday blather/lie fest in quite some time

because they don't call their 'guests' on their loose interpretation of facts...or rather they are fact free pos...