Tuesday, December 28, 2010

What Exactly Is A "Pundit" Supposed to Be?

The organization Politifact (as well as others) have surfaced to verify the veracity of claims made by politicians and media personalities.  Among other lists, they maintain a running "fact rating" on pundits here in the states.  I'm not sure what the origins of the word "pundit" are, but if you take a look at the list, it seems that a really good definition would be: liar who is desperately trying to boost the parent organization's ratings.  Most of what these people are telling viewers is either mostly or completely false.  And they are on "news" programs!


The expected ignorers-of-facts are there (Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Keith Obermann), but I was disappointed to see Mary Matalin & George Will on there as telling complete falsehoods.  I thought they were both better than that.

Of course, the truly scary part of this is not that they are lying--they're doing it for money & ratings.  The scary thing is the people who actually watch these people to find out what to think.  It's enough to drive one to stop referring to human beings as "intelligent beings."

1 comment:

Abby said...

I like the "pants on fire" icon at that site. Off subject: I usually read your posts through a reader and did not see your blog site update. Nice veggies!

The Look

Anyone who thinks cats can't learn things hasn't lived with one. It took Theo maybe a month into his diet to figure out that I can...