Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
mudds [2019/03/08 20:32] – Carlos Pedrazamudds [2024/04/14 20:23] (current) – [Introduction] revised to eliminate redundant wording Carlos Pedraza
Line 7: Line 7:
 {{page>byline}} {{page>byline}}
  
-We decided following the example of the Washington Post in using a simple graphic to depict our assessment of the factualness of statements made by people covered by **AxaMonitor**.+We decided to follow the example of the Washington Post in using a simple graphic to depict our assessment of how factual statements made by people covered by **AxaMonitor** are.
  
 ===== Introduction ===== ===== Introduction =====
  
- +Like the Post's "Pinnochios," **AxaMonitor** will use its own Trek character, an infamous adversary known for his only occasional relationship with the truth.
-Like the Post's "Pinnochios," **AxaMonitor** will use its own Trek character, a well-known adversary known for his only occasional relationship with the truth.+
  
 <WRAP right info round 320px> <WRAP right info round 320px>
Line 29: Line 28:
 Mudd, for short. One of the most popular antagonists of Star Trek's original series, the character was even revived on The Animated Series and more recently on //Star Trek: Discovery//. Mudd, for short. One of the most popular antagonists of Star Trek's original series, the character was even revived on The Animated Series and more recently on //Star Trek: Discovery//.
  
-He's a lying, thieving, self-aggrandizing, greedy and scurrilous scoundrel. So what better Star Trek character to use to rate the veracity and intent of statements upon which we report. Here's how we judge their truthfulness (descriptions adapted from the Washington Post):(([[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/|Fact Checker: The Truth Behind The Rhetoric]], Glenn Kessler, The Washington Post, retrieved 3/8/19))+He's a lying, thieving, self-aggrandizing, greedy and scurrilous scoundrel. So what better Star Trek character to use to rate the veracity and intent of statements upon which we report. Here's how we judge their truthfulness (descriptions adapted from the Washington Post):(([[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/|Fact Checker: The Truth Behind The Rhetoric]], Glenn Kessler, The Washington Post, retrieved 3/8/19.))
  
 ===== Muddying the Truth ===== ===== Muddying the Truth =====
Line 40: Line 39:
 </WRAP> </WRAP>
  
-{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}} <fs large>**Two Mudds**</fs> \\ Significant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. Someone can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people. (Think of it as “half true.”)+{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}} <fs large>**Two Mudds**</fs> Significant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. Someone can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people. (Think of it as “half true.”)
  
-{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}} <fs large>**Three Mudds**</fs> \\ Significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions — “mostly false.” This could include statements that are technically correct (based on some kind of data source) but taken so much out of context as to significantly mislead. The line between Two Muds and Three Mudds can be bit fuzzy, so we'll try to what tips us toward a Three.+{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}} <fs large>**Three Mudds**</fs> \\ Significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions — “mostly false.” This could include statements that are technically correct (based on some kind of data source) but taken so much out of context as to significantly mislead. The line between Two Mudds and Three Mudds can be bit fuzzy, so we'll try to explain what tips us toward a Three.
  
-{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}} <fs large>**Four Mudds**</fs> \\ //Whoppers//. Just. Wow. +{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}}{{::mudd.png?nolink |}} <fs large>**Four Mudds**</fs> \\ //Whoppers//. Just. Wow. \\ 
-\\ \\ +\\ 
-{{::spock_truth_sm.png?nolink |}} <fs 24px>**Spock's Science Insignia**</fs> \\ Statements and claims that contain “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” will be recognized with our prized Spock Science Insignia. We tend to reserve this for claims that are unexpectedly true, so it is not awarded very often.+\\ 
 +{{:spock_truth_sm.png?nolink |}}<fs 18px>**Spock's Science Insignia**</fs> \\ 
 +Statements and claims that contain “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” will be recognized with our prized Spock Science Insignia. We tend to reserve this for claims that are unexpectedly true, so it is not awarded very often.
  
-{{:mudd_invert.png?nolink |}} <fs 24px>**Upside-Down Mudd**</fs>  \\ A statement that represents a clear but unacknowledged “flip-flop” from a previously-held position.+{{:mudd_invert.png?bottom&nolink |}} <fs 24px>**Upside-Down Mudd**</fs>  \\ A statement that represents a clear but unacknowledged “flip-flop” from a previously-held position.
  
-{{::sf_jag_sm.png?direct |}} <fs x-large>**Verdict Pending**</fs> \\ Sometimes we can't render a snap judgment because the issue is very complex or there are good arguments on both sides. In such cases, we'll reserve judgment until we know more. We want AxaMonitor to illuminate factual controversies that are not easily resolved.+{{::sf_jag_sm.png?direct |}} <fs x-large>**Weighing Judgment**</fs> \\ Sometimes we can't render a snap judgment because the issue is very complex or there are good arguments on both sides. In such cases, we'll reserve judgment until we know more. We want AxaMonitor to illuminate factual controversies that are not easily resolved.
  
-==== Reoffenders ====+==== Re-offenders ====
  
-{{::tantalus_v.png?40&nolink |}}Finally, we'll also be on the lookout for "Reoffenders" — people who continue to make claims that have already been debunked.+{{::tantalus_v.png?40&nolink |}}Finally, we'll also be on the lookout for "Re-offenders" — people who continue to make claims that have already been debunked.
  
 ---- ----
Line 66: Line 67:
 We'll look to revise any judgments if new evidence emerges, and we encourage feedback from readers on the [[face>groups/axamonitor/|AxaMonitor Facebook group]]. Please join the discussions on Facebook, or [[feedback|contact]] **AxaMonitor** directly with tips, suggestions, and complaints.  We'll look to revise any judgments if new evidence emerges, and we encourage feedback from readers on the [[face>groups/axamonitor/|AxaMonitor Facebook group]]. Please join the discussions on Facebook, or [[feedback|contact]] **AxaMonitor** directly with tips, suggestions, and complaints. 
  
-Think we're being unfair? Let us know; we're happy to discuss it. {{page>footer}} {{tags>about AxaMonitor fact_check}}+Think we're being unfair? Let us know; we're happy to discuss it. {{:axamonitor-ico.gif?nolink|}} 
 + 
 +<WRAP tip 75%> 
 +<wrap em>COMMENTS</wrap> \\ 
 +Discuss this article in [[face>groups/axamonitor/|AxaMonitor's Facebook group]]. 
 +</WRAP> 
 +---- 
 +**Keywords** {{tag>about AxaMonitor fact_check Mudds}}