TED Conversations

Warren Gee

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Would having a "Fact Check Accurate" seal on a political ad help you in deciding what to vote for?

As part of my English thesis, this is question 2 relating to the ability to sort out if political ads are truthful in their disclosure to the public.

+2
Share:

Closing Statement from Warren Gee

With the limited number of responses, an analysis of the questions are as follows:
· The voters were generally not trusting the idea that a seal of approval would help them believe that a political ad was truthful.
· The voters were more inclined to support a measure that would require that political ads must be fact checked prior to being used publicly
· The voters were evenly divided that if they were an elected official, that they would support the practice of submitting a political ad prior to putting the ad out to the public.
· Of the elected officials that responded, one was trusting the idea that a seal of approval would help them believe that a political ad was truthful, whereas one would be trusting as long as the fact checking organization was reputable.
· Of the elected officials that responded, one was inclined to support a measure that would require that political ads to be fact checked prior to being used publicly where one would be willing to examine the language of such measure.
· Of the elected officials that responded, both would support the practice of submitting a political ad prior to putting the ad out to the public noting that one would do so if the fact checking organization was reputable.
Answers submitted by eight of the nine non-elected respondents and one elected respondent, were done so with a “Yes” or “No” answer. One elected respondent and one non-elected respondent did not answer either “Yes” or “No” but with comments regarding qualifiers to the original questions. In actuality, I had a hidden agenda to the questions that I posed to both the elected and non-elected respondents. In leaving out the qualifiers, I suspected that the elected officials may not respond or would answer in a way that would avoid a total commitment of a simple “Yes” or “No” answer, and likewise I suspected that the common voter would simply see the question for what it was and just put “Yes” or “No”. I was not disappointed with the answers.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 19 2013: Yes. Better yet, fine candidates, networks, and reporters each time a statement made about any candidate can not be proven.

    Such an income source might help offset the National debt!
    • thumb
      Apr 20 2013: I like that and I agree that with so much BS being thrown out there, that the national debt would be all dried up in very little time. Thank you for your reply.
    • thumb
      Apr 30 2013: A fine against any form of speech is a dangerous idea as it would directly threaten free speech. Existing laws about slander and lible are in place and can be applied, perhaps applying the wire fraud laws to things like false statements in ads or (my pet peeve) those ads that masquerade as news or emergency broadcasts.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.