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 blurry line between news reporting and editorial work.  I've long been intrigued by an infrequently examined 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 issues with the information that the PolitiFact contributors deemed ""factual."  My concerns are about selection bias as evidenced by the subjects chosen for scrutiny.  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 using 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. 

Editors leveraging PolitiFact Wisconsin chose articles that identify Conservatives for falsehoods, 25 out of 33 times (76%) that they published such ratings from 2024 public statements.  

Neither political party has a monopoly on the truth; but editors use PolitiFact Wisconsin to disproportionately target Conservatives.  At least for 2024, I rate that assertion True.