This week, readers sent us compliments about our fact-checking and some criticism for using “loaded” words.
In the FactCheck Mailbag, we feature some of the email we receive. Readers can send comments to email@example.com. Letters may be edited for length.
In reference to ["Gingrich’s Inflated Gasoline Claim," Feb. 7]: Wow! FactCheck delivers again! Three reasons:
- Clearly points out unsubstantiated claims by a politician.
- Gives information most folks may be interested in but ignored by mainstream press/media.
- Gives further background to help interpret the data presented (definition of RVP, summer vs. winter gas, etc.).
Notably, this article was more than just the usual “you’ve been caught” — it was a science lesson! If only the politicians themselves would take the time to educate the public about the issues at hand, instead of resorting to fear, uncertainty and doubt.
As an engineer dealing first-hand with on-vehicle mobility (engines/transmissions/etc.), this is very interesting stuff (although we usually deal with diesel and similar fuels, not gasoline). Don’t skimp on the details — people need to know to understand what is really going (or not going) on.
I have been needing a site such as yours. Trying to make sense of it all is mind-boggling and depressing. Thank goodness for what appears to be unbiased fact-checking.
One of my favorite sites now!
Greenwood Village, Colo.
FactCheck seems to have trouble excising “loaded” words from its articles. If he quoted from a different study ["Gingrich’s Inflated Gasoline Claim," Feb. 7], Mr. Gingrich neither “inflated” nor “exaggerated” anything. If [the Environmental Protection Agency] has not done a study, then just say so. You do a great job; just stick to the facts.