Listen to the article
In a striking critique of fact-checking website PolitiFact, media watchdog Tim Graham has unveiled statistics suggesting a significant partisan bias in how the organization evaluates political statements, particularly those made by former President Donald Trump.
Graham, director of media analysis at the Media Research Center, points to a reader comment published by PolitiFact that questioned the site’s seeming fixation on Trump. While PolitiFact’s audience chief Ellen Hine acknowledged publishing over 1,124 fact checks on Trump, she maintained their process was nonpartisan, claiming they “try to select facts to check from all sides of the political spectrum.”
However, Graham’s analysis tells a different story. In the first five months of 2025, PolitiFact conducted 68 “Truth-O-Meter” evaluations of Republican statements compared to just 23 for Democrats. More tellingly, 85% of Republican statements were rated “Mostly False,” “False,” or “Pants on Fire,” while only 39% of Democratic statements received similar negative ratings.
The disparity appears even more pronounced when comparing presidential coverage. From January through October 22, Trump received negative truth ratings in 50 out of 54 fact checks—a staggering 92.5%. The remaining four were merely “Half True,” with no statements earning “True” or “Mostly True” designations. In fact, according to Graham, Trump hasn’t received a “Mostly True” rating since October 18, 2024.
During this same period, Trump was labeled a “Pants on Fire” liar—PolitiFact’s most severe rating—13 times, representing nearly a quarter of all his fact checks. Since PolitiFact’s inception in 2007, Trump has accumulated 217 “Pants on Fire” ratings compared to just seven for President Joe Biden throughout his political career.
Contrasting this with Biden’s treatment during the early months of his presidency in 2021 reveals a stark difference. Biden was fact-checked 34 times but deemed false in only 14 instances (41%). Moreover, Biden received “True” or “Mostly True” ratings 10 times during this period.
Graham argues the partisan nature of PolitiFact’s approach extends beyond just frequency and ratings. He notes that in 2025, every individual (as opposed to social media sites) who received a “Pants on Fire” rating was politically right-leaning. This list includes Trump, former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Elon Musk, Senator Mike Lee, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, “Shark Tank” personality Kevin O’Leary, and InfoWars’ Alex Jones.
While acknowledging that some fact checks correctly identify false statements, Graham argues the overall pattern reveals an aggressive approach toward conservative figures. He cites specific examples where Trump’s characterizations of opponents as “communists” were fact-checked and rated false, while similar hyperbolic claims from Democrats labeling Trump a “fascist” receive no scrutiny.
“This isn’t ‘independent fact-checking.’ It’s weaponized public relations,” Graham concludes, suggesting that PolitiFact’s approach to truth evaluation has abandoned objectivity in favor of partisan messaging.
This criticism comes at a time of increasing scrutiny of fact-checking organizations and growing public skepticism about media bias, raising important questions about who fact-checks the fact-checkers and how Americans should evaluate claims of political neutrality in media analysis.
Verify This Yourself
Use these professional tools to fact-check and investigate claims independently
Reverse Image Search
Check if this image has been used elsewhere or in different contexts
Ask Our AI About This Claim
Get instant answers with web-powered AI analysis
Related Fact-Checks
See what other fact-checkers have said about similar claims
Want More Verification Tools?
Access our full suite of professional disinformation monitoring and investigation tools
4 Comments
It’s concerning if there are indeed issues with partisan bias at PolitiFact. Fact-checkers play a vital role, and their work must be scrupulously fair and nonpartisan. Rigorous self-assessment and external review could help identify and address any problematic patterns.
Interesting take on the alleged bias at PolitiFact. I’d be curious to see a more detailed, nuanced analysis of their fact-checking process and methodology. Fact-checking can be a tricky business, and it’s important to understand the full context.
While I appreciate Graham’s attempt to hold PolitiFact accountable, the statistics alone don’t necessarily prove partisan bias. Fact-checking involves complex judgment calls, and the disparate ratings could reflect genuine differences in the accuracy of statements made by each party.
This is an important issue that deserves rigorous, impartial scrutiny. I hope both sides can engage in good-faith discussions to improve transparency and trust in the fact-checking process, rather than making accusations of bias.