Why Fact-Checking Is Important

Mark of New Jersey

Mark is a Founding Editor of The League of Ordinary Gentlemen, the predecessor of Ordinary Times.

Related Post Roulette

16 Responses

  1. Jonathan says:

    Good on you, Mark, for the follow up. I’m still a little skeptical as to the “primary purpose” of this contest, but, still, I take your point.

    However, it would have been nice if they had left out this rule:

    Direct viewers to the federal government’s main Web site on rulemaking by including the text ” http://www.Regulations.gov” at some point during your video.

    Although one could demonstrate the importance of rule-making by slagging Regulations.gov, I’m doubtful that such a video would win the award. If they would allow contestants to be a little more independent, I’d cut them more slack.

    Of course, we’re forgetting the most important libertarian-esque point: taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for this! That $2500 could be used to reduce the deficit!Report

  2. greginak says:

    Every time somebody publicly admits to a goof an angel gets its wings.Report

  3. Ken says:

    Mark, thanks for highlighting my disagreement. I maintain that the contest, even if cloaked in mostly neutral language about promoting awareness of the regulatory process, is fairly interpreted as calling for pro-regulatory content and promoting a regulatory agenda. As I said, one of the best indications of this is their choice to highlight videos that won contests sponsored by particular departments — all of which support those departments’ missions.Report

    • Mark Thompson in reply to Ken says:

      @Ken, I figure that the rare occasions on which I disagree with you and Patrick are pretty well worth highlighting since they are so rare.

      But the highlighting of the other contests still doesn’t really bug me, particularly assuming (as I do) that they’re the only such prior contests. I don’t have access to audio right now, so I may well be wrong, but it doesn’t seem like those videos should be interpreted as “Hooray, government!” or even necessarily “support EPA/HHS” so much as they’re looking to raise awareness about public health issues, which I view as an actually legitimate governmental function (as opposed to a mildly illegitimate governmental function).

      Admittedly, this may be a distinction without a difference. Still, assuming those are the only prior EPA/HHS run contests, I’m loathe to read too much into the decision to put them up as examples. It may well have been a tone-deaf decision to put up any examples of past contests at all, and I see how it could lead to the inference you’re making, but I’ve known too many bureaucrats to think that there was some sort of subliminal implication intended here.Report

  4. Bob Cheeks says:

    Commie EPA thugs..shut ’em down, starve ’em out, bunch of parasites, useless at teats on a boar hog!Report

  5. Rufus F. says:

    I’ll never believe anything you say again.Report

  6. Louis B. says:

    Come on, the Schoolhouse Rock video falls pretty cleanly in the category of “outright propaganda”.Report