# Is it appropriate for news organizations to "fact check" books? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 18, 2009, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029 "2009-11-18T15:23:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/121 "2009-11-19T18:32:21Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Not really. He published _Dreams From My Father_ after he was elected as president of the Harvard Law Review. And, how many people outside the legal profession give a shit who the president of the Harvard Law Review is? Likewise if Palin had written a book when she was mayor of Wasilla, nobody would have cared. As other posters here have mentioned, Palin right now is far more famous than Obama was at any point prior to his announcing his presidential candidacy. And you have to remember for a long time he was considered something of a dark horse candidate (no pun intended). When he published “Audacity of Hope,” in 2006 he was one of at least a half-dozen Democrats whose names were being thrown around as possible contenders. And most serious political pundits were all but finalizing coronation plans for Hillary. Palin right now is one of most prominent people, if not the most prominent person in the Republican Party. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/122 "2009-11-19T18:55:16Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t know anybody except the really partisan morons who expect Sarah Palin to get a fair break from the media. That’s my point - the media pretense is that they are objective. The trouble is maintaining the pose in the teeth of examples like this one. Thing is Sarah Palin is _known_ to be fast and loose with the truth. Repeatedly. Over and over again. Nobody needs to work hard to find the errors. It is not nitpicking. She is chock full of blatant inaccuracies (outright lies, see below for a partial list). As I mentioned earlier it is like shooting fish in a barrel to pick her apart. Then consider her fame. A fame she actively seeks. Hell, there is almost no other way to parse her stepping down as Governor of Alaska than that she wanted to stay on the stage and in the spotlight and garner money which she could not have done had she remained Governor. In short, she puts _herself_ there. It would have been trivial for her or her publisher to have fact checked her book before publishing. She had HUGE pre-orders for the book. They knew they would be making a lot of money so the added expense would be trivial. They chose not to. The inaccuracies must be willful. > [@](#): > > So for the record, let it be known that the candidate for vice-president for the GOP is a compulsive, repetitive, demonstrable liar. If you follow the links, here is the proof. I repeat: proof: > > - She has lied about the Bridge To Nowhere. She ran for office favoring it, wore a sweatshirt defending it, and only gave it up when the federal congress, Senator McCain in particular, went ballistic. She kept the money anyway and favors funding Don Young’s Way, at twice the cost of the original bridge. > > - She has lied about her firing of the town librarian and police chief of Wasilla, Alaska. > > - She has lied about pressure on Alaska’s public safety commissioner to fire her ex-brother-in-law. > > - She has lied about her previous statements on climate change. > > - She has lied about Alaska’s contribution to America’s oil and gas production. > > - She has lied about when she asked her daughters for their permission for her to run for vice-president. > > - She has lied about the actual progress in constructing a natural gas pipeline from Alaska. > > - She has lied about Obama’s position on habeas corpus. > > - She has lied about her alleged tolerance of homosexuality. > > - She has lied about the use or non-use of a TelePrompter at the St Paul convention. > > - She has lied about her alleged pay-cut as mayor of Wasilla. > > - She has lied about what Alaska’s state scientists concluded about the health of the polar bear population in Alaska. > > You cannot trust a word she says. On anything. > > SOURCE: [http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the\_daily\_dish/2008/09/the-twelve-odd.html](http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/the-twelve-odd.html) (note the linked article has cites for all of the claims made) So, when Palin puts out a book and it is big news it can be no wonder that people fall over themselves finding what new turd piles she has laid. > [@](#): > > If AP wants to be the unpaid propaganda wing of the Democratic party, they should admit it up front. Will Fox do the same then and admit to being a shill for the Republican party? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Dorothea\_Book](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dorothea\_Book](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dorothea_Book)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/123 "2009-11-19T19:01:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > How unhelpfully stupid, **Dorothea**. You apparently didn’t bother to read all the way to the next paragraph. Au contraire, **Shodan** I most certainly read through your paragraph and the whole of your post. It was as unpersuasive as have been all your attempts to claim that Obama was as much in the spotlight in 06 as in Palin is now. Once again, where is the evidence of lack of fact-checking into Obama’s writings? ---
**Author:** ![Kolga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e56c9b/32.png) [@Kolga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolga)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/124 "2009-11-19T19:01:51Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > I really have to admit that Palin-lovers are apparently seeing the world from an entirely different angle than I am to be taking her seriously. I mean, they’re hanging by their toes from a tree branch or something. Because I not only have trouble taking HER seriously, but I have trouble taking THEM seriously because of it. Driving in to work today, I was listening to NPR covering a crowd of people who waited in line (some for 12 hours) at a mall in Grand Rapids, MI, yesterday to pick up a copy of the book and meet her and get their book signed. Every single one of the people interviewed said, in their discussion of her, that one of the things they admired about her was her honesty, and how she was completely honest and forthright in everything she did and said, when no other politician was that way. Every. Single. One. I thought “are you people living on the same planet as the rest of us?” ---
**Author:** ![Clark\_K](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c77e96/32.png) [@Clark\_K](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clark_K)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/125 "2009-11-19T19:23:14Z")
As a reporter, let me make a few observations: \_ When “Audacity of Hope” came out, it was not in any way the Event that “Going Rogue” is. It was to Palin’s book as “Pan’s Labrynth” was to “Lord of the Rings.” It was Hillary Duff to Lindsay Lohan. In other words, it simply wasn’t as newsworthy. \_ The kind of stand-alone fact check stories under discussion here are something of a new trend. They weren’t nearly as common when “Audacity” came out. \_ Once Obama became big news, reporters constantly referred back to “Audacity” to check its facts and compare what he was saying on the campaign trail to what he had written. His political opponents did the same. However, there probably weren’t stand-alone stories just on “Audacity” and its accuracy. \_ “Audacity” is still being fact-checked in the sense that organizations like Politifact and FactCheck compare what he’s saying now to what he wrote then and whether it was accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/126 "2009-11-19T20:50:41Z")
When you have somebody with a long and stories history of telling lies like Sarah Palin then it’s inevitable that an entire book written by her will come under scrutiny. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/127 "2009-11-19T20:58:21Z")
> [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > When you have somebody with a long and stories history of telling lies like Sarah Palin then it’s inevitable that an entire book written by her will come under scrutiny. Especially when it’s a book that describes very recent public events that pretty much everyone around actually lived through. It’s not like we’re talking about the historical events surrounding the founding of Juneau or something…we’re talking about the most recent presidential election, approximately one year ago. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/128 "2009-11-19T21:04:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > > [@Kimstu](#): > > > > She’s not running for national office at the moment > > In exactly the same way that Obama was not running for President or Vice-President when his book came out. Oh **Shodan** , you’re just being pathetic here. Palin is a very **recent** candidate for Vice-President, and her massively high-profile candidacy has made her into a universally recognized household name at this time, at a level of public awareness that is orders of magnitude beyond Obama’s in 2006 when he had no national campaign on his resume. Yes, Palin is a current non-candidate for national office, but emphatically **not** “in exactly the same way” that Obama was back in 2006. Sheesh. > [@Shodan](#): > > The only obvious fact is the one you are trying desperately to deny - there is a rather clear double standard. The only way you can argue for this being a “clear double standard” is by twisting the facts into pretzels trying to disguise an extremely salient difference in the actual situations of the two authors in question at the time their books came out. The deeper you keep digging on this effort, the sillier you make your argument look. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/129 "2009-11-19T21:09:17Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > The deeper you keep digging on this effort, the sillier you make your argument look. Conservatism cannot fail. It can only be brutally betrayed and stabbed in the back by outside forces devoted to the rapid subversion of the United States to a godless communistic society. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/130 "2009-11-19T21:11:54Z")
And it follows that anything that _does_ fail is not _true_ conservatism anyway. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/131 "2009-11-19T21:33:14Z")
Is it “appropriate” for news organizations to fact check books? :mad: Is it APPROPRIATE? What is the POINT of having a free press if not to call BULLSHIT on LIES? Is this what conservatism in America has come to? This decadent postmodern attitude that there is no such thing as objective truth, only political expediency? Have we finally arrived at the point where the epistemology of French literary critics becomes the dominant mode of discourse for the American right? Can it actually be that raw disregard for objective truth is now something to be willfully overlooked lest it be thought offensive or inappropriate? We wouldn’t want to hurt anyone’s feeling, right? We wouldn’t want to make anyone feel BAD about themselves by pointing out they’re spouting a load of CRAP. We wouldn’t want to make an entire political movement look like mouth-breathing morons for their uncritical acceptance of that load of crap. Because that would be … inappropriate. Jesus. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/132 "2009-11-19T22:02:47Z")
Palin should have welcomed fact checking. It was her opportunity to prove she is not a self serving bimbo. She could prove she was a serious politician and deserves some respect. She failed yet again. I suppose this is her political funeral dirge. Her epitaph:She quit as governor and took the money and ran". ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/133 "2009-11-19T22:53:21Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The only obvious fact is the one you are trying desperately to deny - there is a rather clear double standard. Sarah Palin looks like a special case here, as plenty of both Democrats and Republican published books get skipped over by the AP when it comes to fact-checking. So what exactly is this “clear double standard” you’re talking about? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/134 "2009-11-19T23:02:28Z")
> [@Algorithm](#): > > Sarah Palin looks like a special case here, as plenty of both Democrats and Republican published books get skipped over by the AP when it comes to fact-checking. So what exactly is this “clear double standard” you’re talking about? Perhaps “extremely famous people with a reputation for being liars get facked checked more than less famous people who don’t lie as much.”? Life is _so_ unfair. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/135 "2009-11-19T23:32:49Z")
Just to even the playing field, maybe a bunch more could be dedicated to fact checking AL Gore’s new effort, \*[Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis](http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Our-Choice/Al-Gore/e/9781594867347) \* ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/136 "2009-11-19T23:38:13Z")
Oh, it will be fact-checked, of this you may be certain. Only slightly less certain it will be found to be full of lies, conspiracy, skulduggery, and socialism. George Soros and the Protocols of the Elders of ACORN will figure prominently. That these facts are not trumpeted in daily headlines will be pointed to as clear indicators of liberal bias. And so it goes. ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2009, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/137 "2009-11-20T00:02:07Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t know anybody except the really partisan morons who expect Sarah Palin to get a fair break from the media. That’s my point - the media pretense is that they are objective. The trouble is maintaining the pose in the teeth of examples like this one. > > If AP wants to be the unpaid propaganda wing of the Democratic party, they should admit it up front. I hold no particular opinion on the existence or non-existence of a bias in the mainstream media. I consume so little of it that it’s hard to give a shit. On the other hand, you can’t seriously believe that a high-profile, vocal critic of the mainstream media is going to be treated with dispassionate aplomb by the same people she’s been slamming for the past year and a half. It’s kind of like the college sophomore who turns in a scathing review of ee cummings, ridiculing his arrogant departure from accepted standards of orthography, being surprised when the professor counts off for his own grammatical errors. If you’re going to throw rocks, don’t be surprised if you get a few of your own windows broken. This is simple human nature, not evidence of a larger bias or non-bias on unrelated issues. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2009, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/138 "2009-11-20T00:14:55Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t know anybody except the really partisan morons who expect Sarah Palin to get a fair break from the media. That’s my point - the media pretense is that they are objective. The trouble is maintaining the pose in the teeth of examples like this one. > > If AP wants to be the unpaid propaganda wing of the Democratic party, they should admit it up front. > > Regards, > Shodan Oh look, a poisoned well! Anybody who disagrees with **Shodan** is a really partisan moron! Which means that his extremely convenient bullshit partisan martyr opinion _must_ be correct. Any _objective_ reporter would \*clearly \*report that she is a flawless goddess who is perfectly honest and right in every way. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2009, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/139 "2009-11-20T00:25:32Z")
> [@](#): > > Any objective reporter would clearly report that she is a flawless goddess who is perfectly honest and right in every way. No, that would get you labeled as sexist. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2009, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029/140 "2009-11-20T00:40:31Z")
This is a new world. There is fact checking going on everywhere. The internets has changed that forever. Even conservatives, who apparently should be exempt, will have every thing they say and write ,thoroughly checked. We have enjoined big debates over everything Gore wrote. Nobody claimed he should not own up to everything he said. I an sure SHODAN jumped in . But Palin, thats different. She is too stupid and greedy to be fact checked. She is special. Gores defenders don’t say he should not be responsible for what he writes. Obamas defenders don’t say he should not be criticized. But, Palin is different. She is a repub and exempted from defending what she says. To question her is an act of political assassination. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-appropriate-for-news-organizations-to-fact-check-books/518029.md?page=8)