How to 'fact check' politicians, emails, social media

Interested in fact-checking some of the chain emails or political talk you are hearing?

Here are two of the better-known and respected sites for such endeavors: www.FactCheck.org and www.PolitiFact.com.

"Mud-slinging" in political elections is as old as the republic. For most, it doesn't require a fact-checker to understand that virtually all negative campaign ads are light on facts and heavy in distortions. Yet, interestingly, campaigns say they use negative ads because they work - either to re-enforce a voter's position, change a voter's mind - or keep voters away from the polls.

A USA Today editorial last year pointed to a growing trend for candidates to attack fact-checkers after their campaign distortion "whoppers" have been exposed. But the editorial also observes that, predictably, "candidates who cry bias when they're in the cross hairs happily approve when the verdicts go the other way."

The editorial concludes that "fact-checkers aren't perfect, but their analyses are often much closer to the truth than anything you'll hear from the candidates themselves."

As a bonus: If you are interested in money influence on government and policy, check this site: www.opensecrets.org.

Or if you are interested in sniffing out email hoaxes, scams, rumors, urban legends, false inspirational stories and prayer requests or scary calls to action, check these sites: www.Snopes.comwww.TruthOrFiction.com, or www.HoaxSlayer.com.