[equalunique]

Facts can be cherry-picked.

Half-truths can and slightly inaccurate statements can be construed as either hard-TRUE or hard-FALSE.

On the opposite side of the political spectrum, "nuance" in political discussion is an accepted reality.

Gatekeeping is acknowledged as a problem - we know those who position themselves as arbiters of truth are not beyond scrutiny.

It would be contradictory to know these are true but also believe conservatives are deluded in believing that fact-checking is fraught with bias.

>Indeed, conservatives have long claimed that fact-checking was riddled with anti-conservative bias and even conflicts of interest (as when PolitiFact, one of Facebook’s six United States-based fact-checkers, shot down a critique of a Clinton Foundation initiative without disclosing that one of that program’s principal funders was a major donor to PolitiFact’s parent organization, the Poynter Institute).

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/310849-who-will...