So how about that big 11-person fact-check that AP did of Sarah Palin's book? Over at CJR, Greg Marx is unimpressed:
Leaving aside the issue of resource allocation, the question is: Did the fact check deliver?
Not so much — at least not if the phrase “fact check” is going to have any specific meaning....Even accepting all of the AP’s claims, several of the cases it mentions are as much matters of interpretation and analysis as factual accuracy. And in some, the Palin statements that it scrutinizes don’t even make factual claims — meaning that there’s not much to “check.”
....This sort of thing matters because, in an increasingly contested political landscape and wide-open media environment, there really is a need for fact checking....But for the idea of fact checking to have any weight — and any hope of broad credibility — it must mean something more specific than “contesting a statement that we disagree with.” When Sarah Palin talks about “Obama’s ‘death panel,’” she’s spreading misinformation that needs to be repudiated. When she talks about being beckoned by purpose, she’s being a politician. We need to recognize the difference.
I wasn't very impressed with AP's effort either, which is why I didn't blog about it at the time. Somerby is pretty unthrilled too. Better fact checking, please.