Sorting out the "truth" may seem a treacherous endeavor in such a politically polarized time. But we believe our journalists can play a greater role as an honest broker for voters bewildered by the barrage of campaign talk.
So in a move rare for a news organization, we're dedicating a team of reporters and researchers to meticulously examine the rhetoric of candidates and their partisans, and then make a call: Is the claim true or not?
You might think such work would be standard journalistic fare. But many news organizations can spend less money and get less grief if their political reporting sticks to stenography and puffery.
It's easier to record the words and claims of competing candidates than to vet their accuracy. It's easier to write about the strategy of using negative advertising than to do the painstaking research to sort out whether the claim is actually true or false.
— Neil Brown, Executive Editor of the St. Petersburg Times, announcing Politifact, a new project to determine whether candidate statements are actually true.
Fair comment
It is perfectly fair to question my own comments regarding Recchia. Let me point out a few things that I consider different, though I recognize you may not.
1.) I gave full context to the rumor I heard. It was a public discussion, apparently with a Recchia guy in the room who made no comment, at an IND meeting with people quoting discussions in Albany among insiders. This is very different than quoting an unspecified "rumor."
2.) Recchia really had disappeared from the scene, exciting comment, before I heard said rumor. So people were wondering why he was skipping every endorsement meeting of every club in the district, ceding said clubs to Harrison. No one had heard from Recchia or his campaign for while. No one has accused Harrison of being absent.
3.) Whether you realize it or not, there was more substance behind the "rumor" I had cited than I could make public and, in fact, it really was true whatever your sources said. Of if not, Recchia had certainly said things to people enough to give many the impression he was throwing in the towel. It was only after Fossella's complete collapse that Recchia changed his mind...too little too late for most of his supporters. But I am willing to admit that this one doesn't matter because I wasn't able to actually CITE the info I had so I had to rely on 1 and 2.
I know you were a critic of my mentioning the Albany rumor about Recchia. But come on. When insiders are telling you the scuttlebutt from Albany inside circles, and consider it public knowledge, NO ONE is going to pass it up. Many would have stated it far more definitively than I did. Your source must have heard the discussion because the entire rest of the club did. Why didn't he pipe up? I suspect he knew it to be true but also knew I was letting the cat out of the bag before a final decision had been made so was doing damage control. Either that or Recchia himself was still uncertain but had told too many people about his doubts for Albany to take him seriously anymore. In which case his withdrawal was only a matter of time.
Now please tell me honestly if what I reported and the way I reported it was the same as what the Vito Flunky in this thread is doing?