NY Times Public Editor Arther Brisbane gets guffaws with this query:
Should The Times Be a Truth Vigilante?
I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.
Please. I am sure that as long as they limit their fact-checking to Republicans their readership will be in heaven. No one wants or expects the Times to challenge anything out of the mouth of Barack, Nancy, Harry, or any other prominent Democrat.
And that expectation is reinforced by Mr. Brisbane himself - in ruminating about the wisdom of including more fact-checking in their "news", Mr. Brisbane offers Clarence Thomas and Mitt Romney as recent examples. Dems can relax and continue to run their mouths.