Former Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler reflected on the evolving role of fact-checking amidst the rise of social media and the influence of Donald Trump, acknowledging a past mistake in his handling of the Wuhan lab-leak theory report. Kessler, who left the newspaper after serving as its fact-checker, emphasized the challenges of selection bias and the decline in public trust in media, while remaining defiant against critics who accuse the industry of political bias. His recent interview with Fox News Digital provided insight into the changes in the field over the years, including how the spread of misinformation has complicated the task of verifying facts.
In his remarks, Kessler detailed how the political landscape had shifted since his tenure at The Washington Post, noting that the once-mighty fact-checking industry now struggles with the rapid spread of falsehoods on social media platforms. He pointed to Trump’s impact on the perception of truth, describing him as both a ‘fact-checker’s dream and nightmare’ due to his tendency to speak without regard for accuracy. Kessler also referenced the importance of fact-checking in highlighting substantive policy statements, explaining that the goal had always been to focus on issues that would shed light on public policies rather than minor remarks by politicians. Despite these challenges, Kessler maintained that the role of the fact-checker remains essential, especially in an environment where misinformation can spread rapidly.
Among the topics he discussed was a specific error in his handling of the Wuhan lab-leak theory report from May 2020. Kessler admitted that he had overused question mark headlines, particularly in the title of a report that concluded the coronavirus was unlikely to have originated from a lab. He noted that one of the reporters involved in the story had been upset about his addition of a question mark, arguing that it introduced uncertainty where there was none. Kessler acknowledged the mistake and stated that, if he had the chance to redo the report, he would have removed the questionable wording. He also emphasized that the report had held up well despite new information that has since emerged.
Despite this admission, Kessler remained confident in the value of fact-checking, even as he criticized the industry’s lack of transparency in addressing errors. He called for the reinstatement of an ombudsman at The Washington Post, which he believed would help explain how stories are produced and why certain topics receive more attention than others. Kessler expressed concern that the current system often fails to disclose how decisions are made, leaving readers without a clear understanding of the editorial process. He also noted that, despite efforts by editors to find a replacement, the position at The Washington Post remains vacant, raising concerns about the future of the fact-checking role.
He concluded his interview with hopes that the Post would find a suitable successor to continue the work of fact-checking in a politically divided climate. Kessler described the role as one of the most challenging in journalism, emphasizing the importance of accountability for elected officials while acknowledging the increasing difficulty of maintaining public trust in an environment where misinformation is rampant. His sentiments were echoed by many in the media profession, who have long argued that fact-checking remains essential for preserving the integrity of democratic discourse.