“Truth” and “fact” have as many definitions as “is” for the left. Something can be “fake but accurate” and still a “true” “fact”. Something can be decided in court settlements to have happened but still be “untrue” (e.g. “Bill sexually assaulting women”)
No reason to debate the accuracy of “fact-checkers” until there is an agreement on the word “fact”. Most of the “fact-checkers” come from the Dan Rather School of Journalism where the motto is “Fake But Accurate”. So you need to give up the “old and outdated” definition of “fact” to enter the debate on “fact-checking”.
Be sure to label them correctly.
They're "journobloggers" or "videobloggers".
If we stop calling them "journalists" or "reporters", it WILL get on their last nerve.
They blog for places like Bezos' Blog [WP], Sulzberger's Blog [NYT], or any of the network videoblogs.
I was working up a list of the network videoblogs, as related to their ownership, but I haven't finished it yet. :)