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.
Vanishingly small shot
as of this writing, the Brooklyn Paper reports that Marty's fundraising lags far behind that of the other mayoral hopefuls - so far behind, in fact, that it appears he's not serious about running anymore. Of course, it's possible that Ratner will lay a huge amount of money on him, but at this point it would have to be in the 7-figure range to be meaningful.
While they report that he is still leading voter preference polls, I attribute that to high name recognition as Brooklyn's cheerleader and concert promoter, combined with relatively little attention to this race as yet. If he persists into next year, when people are less distracted by national politics and ready to focus on the mayoralty, any one of the other contenders could easily embarrass him into dropping out. He's simply not in the same class.
Sorry I'm a little late posting on this, but I've been busy lately. ;^)