PolitiFact: factual but selective.

After reading a recent PolitiFact article published in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel  (“Trump, Musk claim ‘fraud’, show no proof”, Feb. 16, 2025), I was reminded of the often blurry line between news reporting and editorial work.  I'm intrigued by this question: who checks the fact-checkers? 

A review of the so-called Truth-O-Meter ratings found at politifact.com/wisconsin reveals a disturbing pattern.  

I have no problem with the information that the PolitiFact contributors deemed ""factual."  My concerns are about selection bias as evidenced by the subjects chosen for scrutiny and facts selected for inclusion.  Consider the two most dubious labels that PolitiFact uses to rate questionable public assertions:  “False” and the all damning “Pants on Fire”.

Last year, PolitiFact Wisconsin (or editors leveraging their work) awarded six 'fire pants' ratings to Republican office holders or Conservative commentators and zero such ratings to Democrat office holders or Progressive commentators.  

A tally of their false ratings was also lopsided.  Out of 27 recipients with a false rating, PolitiFact Wisconsin featured Republicans or Conservative commentators 19 times and Dems or Progressive commentators just 6 times.  (The remaining 2 recipients are relatively neutral parties).  Former Senate candidate Eric Hovde, for example, was singled out 6 times for alleged falsehoods, while his election opponent Sen. Tammy Baldwin, was not selected once. 

To sum it up using 2024 public statements, PolitiFact Wisconsin published articles that identify Conservatives for falsehoods, 25 out of 33 times (76%).  Now, neither party has a monopoly on the truth; but editors using content from PolitiFact Wisconsin disproportionately target Conservatives.  At least for 2024, I rate that assertion True.