Fact-checking Obama's State of the Union speech

With his party reeling from the loss of a Senate seat in Massachusetts and doubts increasing about whether he'll be able to pass his health care plan, President Barack Obama challenged Congress -- and the nation -- to put aside partisanship and tackle the difficult problems facing the country. Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins - via PolitiFact, Columbia Journalism Review, Publish2 (Politics)
Tags Help
Stats Help
# Diggs: 1 (as of 2010-01-30)
# Tweets: 2 (as of 2010-01-27)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Derek Hawkins - Jan 27, 2010 - 7:51 PM PST
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Derek Hawkins - Jan 27, 2010 - 7:53 PM PST

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Jon Mitchell
3.5
by Jon Mitchell - Jan. 28, 2010

I appreciate this interface. It looks old-school, but it's very helpful. The "details" links are well sourced. The problem is only that not enough claims were investigated, but they covered the ones I was most worried about during the speech.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Mike LaBonte
4.6
by Mike LaBonte - Jan. 29, 2010

I like Factcheck's new modular format better than the inline long story format. They still have fairness, thoroughness, and complete source documentation on their side, and this story about Obama's first Satte of the Unnion address is a great example.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Kaizar Campwala
3.8
by Kaizar Campwala - Jan. 29, 2010

I do wish Politifact would give an overall picture. How truthy was Obama's speech, as compared to past State of the Unions, and the Republican response?

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Derek Hawkins
4.0
by Derek Hawkins - Jan. 27, 2010
See Full Review » (2 answers)
Robert B. Elliott
2.3
by Robert B. Elliott - Jan. 31, 2010

Quality journalism? Not quite. Do you smell something? This author can't seem to conceal his bais. He can't resist to call Obama's attempt to compromise & moderate his approach as a flip flop, for instance. He characterizes the statement on the Supreme Court as an exaggeration, which although somewhat rhetorical is essentially true if "unrestricted" means what I think it does. He could have focused on dozens of undeniable facts & claims of great significance, but instead, he chose things of less importance. And, he had to get a few Republican talking points in by rating McDonnell & Boehner, even though this was ostensibly a review of the real State of the Union address, not the fake one. If a majority of Americans oppose "this" ... More »

See Full Review » (6 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.8

Good
from 7 reviews (70% confidence)
Quality
3.8
Facts
4.2
Fairness
3.8
Sourcing
3.8
Style
3.8
Context
3.5
Depth
3.2
Enterprise
3.5
Relevance
4.0
Popularity
3.7
Recommendation
3.7
Credibility
3.4
# Reviews
3.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!