Media fact-checkers self-immolated their credibility when they conspired with Biden government bureaucrats to suppress questions about the possible lab leak origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks and social distancing, and vaccine side effects. As Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) observed, we need new conspiracy theories because “all the old ones turned out to be true.”
I had an up-close and personal encounter with these biased “fact-checkers.” On Jan. 19, 2015, I addressed London’s Henry Jackson Society and decried “no-go zones,” where the police were unable to enforce the law, to proclaim the need for assimilation to accompany immigration. My remarks caused predictable liberal denunciations, and I was invited by the international media to defend my statements. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer challenged my claims that these zones existed but allowed me to cite local police officials to make my case. As such, the media debate amplified my impact and strengthened my argument.
Contrary to their self-appellations, media fact-checkers don’t attack factually inaccurate claims and don’t even wait for liberal critics to make counterclaims, but rather promote liberal ideology. They don’t question liberal claims that biological men can choose to participate in women’s sports, man-made climate change poses such an existential challenge that opportunity costs or contrary evidence must not be considered, and former President Joe Biden maintained his intellectual acuity and vigor to the end. It has reached the point where my conservative colleagues view being attacked by these partisan charlatans who masquerade as objective reporters as a badge of honor.
I recently recorded a video for the Center for a Healthy America expanding on President Donald Trump’s criticisms of Obamacare by noting that former President Barack Obama had promised to reduce insurance premiums, but in fact premiums increased by 80%.
Recently retired Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler awarded me “three Pinocchios” on May 13, 2024. He said Obama stopped promising to reduce premiums after his election and cited a former Obama official who claimed that premiums had previously risen faster. This is the partisan defense one might have expected from a Biden campaign official, but not the remit of a self-proclaimed objective fact-checker.
Kessler’s own paper quoted Lucas Graves, a University of Wisconsin–Madison professor: “Within the political establishment on the right, it is now considered quite legitimate — and quite legitimate to say publicly and openly — that you disapprove of fact-checking.” The politicians are simply catching up with their voters.
A 2019 Pew Research Center survey showed 70% of Republicans believed fact-checkers favored one side. Trump complained that the fact-checking during his ABC debate with 2024 Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris amounted to a two-on-one scrum. He again cited fact-checking when he declined to do a 60 Minutes interview and delayed his appearance before the National Association of Black Journalists over their desire to fact-check him.
Mark Zuckerberg, who responded to Trump’s first election by launching Meta’s fact-checking program, responded to his second term by joining X in moving from a centralized fact-checking model to crowd-sourced commentary. Zuckerberg acknowledged that fact-checkers had become “politically biased” and cited his desire to prioritize “free expression.” The Department of Homeland Security, under Secretary Kristi Noem, has turned to publishing its own fact-checking corrections of the press on government websites.
THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS IS A LEFT-WING ACTIVIST GROUP
Genuine debate between competing ideological viewpoints is healthy for our political discourse. As the saying goes, “iron sharpens iron.” But the irony is that partisan fact-checking has increased polarization. The media appointed themselves the sole arbiters of truth, abused this power in the service of liberal ideology, and abdicated their proper role of reporting unbiased facts and competing political claims on an evenhanded basis.
Conservatives have been trained to reject the legacy media, but the temptation is to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Expert opinions should be thoughtfully considered, though not given automatic deference, and many conspiracy theories deserve to be debunked. Voters are better served by hearing both sides. The media should report the news and respect their audiences enough to discern the facts for themselves.
Bobby Jindal is the former governor of Louisiana.
