“Fact Checkers” Once Again Ignore Facts To Incorrectly Label Stacey Abrams Story “False”

I’ve been “fact checked” many times and I can’t think of a single one that is legitimate, honest, and accurate. I can, however, think of many that I was able to refute using the actual facts, as well as many which have been refuted by others using the actual facts.

You see, “fact checking” is a propaganda business based entirely on semantics, context, and manipulation of information and perspective in order to carefully craft or destroy a narrative. And today, we have another incredible example of this concept at work.

PolitiFact just “fact checked” Georgia AG Chris Carr’s claim on Twitter that Stacey Abrams “supported the MLB boycott.” Here’s the tweet.

Our state’s No.1 ranking for business has transformed hundreds of thousands of Georgians’ lives.

Just like when she supported the #MLB boycott, Stacey Abrams’ reckless & condescending comments continue to harm the state she claims to want to govern.#gapol https://t.co/F1D0pfizn5

— Chris Carr (@ChrisCarr_Ga) May 23, 2022

Louis Jacobson with PolitiFact labeled this claim “False” saying, “No, Stacey Abrams didn’t support the baseball All-Star game boycott of Atlanta.” Which, by the way, I’d like you to notice that his “fact check” is about a claim that is not made, specifically that she supported the “baseball All-Star game boycott of Atlanta.” Carr actually just said “the MLB boycott,” and the exact verbiage matters. Jacobson is “fact checking” claims not in evidence. Here’s his Tweet and “fact check.”

My latest @PolitiFact: No, Stacey Abrams didn’t support the baseball All-Star game boycott of Atlanta, despite what a leading Georgia Republican said.https://t.co/KdJoerRA6x pic.twitter.com/PUxBoD8n1K

— Louis Jacobson (@loujacobson) May 24, 2022

His “fact check” is based on her public statements regarding the All-Star game boycott and subsequent move from Atlanta to Colorado, which statements are not supportive of that boycott. So in that regard, his “fact check” appears accurate. But what the “fact checker” failed to include in his “fact check,” and what he’s hoping you don’t already know, is that Stacey Abrams was one of the most vocal and perhaps even the most instrumental individual in instigating the MLB’s “boycott” behavior in the first place, albeit from behind the scenes, despite what she publicly said after she got that ball rolling. Only after fierce public backlash to MLB’s decision to move the All-Star game did she publicly express non-supportive sentiments. And at the time, everyone involved was surprised at her seemingly non-supportive public statements after having been the one leading the boycott charge.

Charles Gasparino of FOX Business, a journalist who followed the MLB boycott story from the beginning, said at the time, “SCOOP: @MLB sources say owners were blindsided at least by the timing of @RobManfred’s decision to pull the All-Star game from Atlanta. Also said his decision came after speaking w @staceyabrams, which is odd since she has now said she’s against the boycott. Story developing.”

SCOOP: @MLB sources say owners were blindsided at least by the timing of @RobManfred‘s decision to pull the All-Star game from Atlanta. Also said his decision came after speaking w @staceyabrams, which is odd since she has now said she’s against the boycott. Story developing

— Charles Gasparino (@CGasparino) April 7, 2021

He shortly afterward published an article titled “MLB commissioner decided to move All-Star Game after pressure from Stacey Abrams on voting issues: sources.”

“Abrams told a senior league official that she wanted him [Robert Manfred] to denounce the Georgia voting rights law, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter. People associated with Sharpton’s civil rights organization, and James’s voting right group, “More than a Vote” also pressured league officials, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter. After these conversations, Manfred believed the All Star game would be turned into a political event and players would boycott the game, these people say. Baseball sources say that Abrams’ current stance, that she is disappointed about the Georgia boycott, is suspect because she was among the most prominent political operatives to pressure the league to denounce the new law….In a statement to Fox New, Abrams spokesman Seth Bringman downplayed her role in the entire matter.”

So the “fact checker” conveniently omitted certain incredibly important facts in order to support the narrative he wanted to push and to destroy a narrative he wanted people to believe was false. He used semantics and manipulation of information to shape the story the way he wanted it to appear, even if it wasn’t entirely factually accurate. Did Stacey Abrams publicly support the MLB All-Star Game move boycott once it was officially announced? Her public statements on the subject say no. But did she support and even encourage the concept of a boycott when she was pressuring Manfred to move the All-Star Game in protest of voting laws she opposes? The facts say that yes, she did. And Carr asserted that she “supported the MLB boycott.”

At the very least, the “fact checker” should have included all the facts, both regarding her involvement in instigating the boycott and her later public statements against it, and labeled the claim as ambiguous because Stacey Abrams’ behavior on the subject has been entirely inconsistent. But he didn’t. He determined the claim to be entirely “false” by excluding important facts, because he doesn’t want people to see the facts about her instigating the boycott. See how this works?

Mind you, the reason they do these “fact checks” is because it gives them an excuse to censor content they don’t like. Anyone who is touched by the “false” label of this “fact check,” despite the fact that the claim is actually mostly true, is subject to censorship.  Their pages are shadow banned for disseminating false information. Their content doesn’t populate in search results and their name and content isn’t suggested. Companies and organizations who published the material that got “fact checked” will be subjected to days or weeks of shadow banning by algorithms that downgrade their content visibility, even if the content is unrelated, simply for the sin of having published something that got “fact checked.”