If your fact-checking column finds the need to use the nonsensical phrase “true but false”, that’s a hint that you’re not actually doing fact-checking. In this instance we can see the absurd lengths to which the Washington Post will go to avoid acknowledging a Republican claim as true.
The claim in question is John Boehner’s statement that over half the people who would be subject to the Democrats’ proposed new millionaire surtax are actually small-business owners. The claim is true. In fact, it’s overly conservative: according to the Treasury Department, the actual number is 70%.
But the Washington Post doesn’t want to leave it there, so they search for a more nuanced analysis. Unsurprisingly, if you narrow the definition of “small-business owner” to exclude some small business owners, you can make the percentage go down. If you narrow it enough, you can get the percentage below 50%. The narrow definition is better, they argue, and thereby conclude that Boehner’s true statement is actually false.
The general problem here, once again, is opinion-policing masquerading as fact-checking. It is perfectly legitimate to debate the meaning of small-business owner. I might even agree with their general point, if not with exactly where to put the knob. But that is argument, not fact-checking. You can’t call someone a liar just because you have a counter-argument.
Internet Scofflaw 