On her show last night, Rachel Maddow tackled poor fact-checking head-on when she called out Politifact for their sloppy work fact-checking the claim that in 29 states employers can fire employees for being or for appearing to be gay. The claim - originally made by Martina Navritilova on Sunday when she appeared on a talk show to discus LGBT rights - is true. Currently, only 21 states and Washington D.C. offer some form of LGBT employment protection - leaving 29 states without protections. Politifact's analysis even points this out. But then - in an amazing show of poor analysis - they gave her statement a "half true" rating.
Why? They argue that, because you can sue in some of those states for being fired, the statement isn't completely true. I have to ask this since perhaps I'm not understanding this the way they wrote it: how does suing someone for something mean you have legal employment protections? Anyone who has taken even introductory level legal / civics education can tell you that the ability to sue for a tort doesn't mean that you will win - and the ability to sue an employer for LGBT termination does not equate to having employment protection.
I won't beleaguer the point - Maddow has some great commentary on the subject: