By James Taranto, who is catching up with my thinking before I had even revealed it:
Longtime readers know this column does not [approve of “fact check” journalism].
Some good work is done under the rubric of “fact checking,” but the label is deceptive.
Calling it “fact checking” is meant to convey an extra degree of objective authority, but “fact check” journalists do not limit themselves to questions of verifiable objective fact.
They present themselves naively and deceptively as above the fray.
Frequently they accuse politicians of dishonesty interpreting facts that are not in dispute. Sometimes their “rulings” are mere opinions on matters about which they do not know the facts, or that are not factual questions at all.
Read JT further on: How to Destroy Journalism – WSJ
Blithe Spirit 