Updated August 5
The Washington Post's "Fact Checker" column has awarded three Pinocchios— "significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions"— to the Washington Redskins' new website defending the team name.
Glenn Kessler wrote Thursday, "The Washington Redskins have been paying for ads promoting a new Web site, RedskinsFacts.com, which supposedly sprung up organically from frustrated former players who wanted to defend the team's embattled name, which many find offensive. (Slate turned up evidence that the Web site is tied to image-makers Burson-Marsteller, which was later confirmed by the team.)
"'We believe the Redskins name deserves to stay,' the Web site says on its 'facts' landing page. 'It epitomizes all the noble qualities we admire about Native Americans — the same intangibles we expect from Washington's gridiron heroes on game day. Honor. Loyalty. Unity. Respect. Courage. And more. On this page, you can read more about the storied history of the Redskins identity.'
"Anytime an organization sets up a 'facts' Web site, it calls out for fact checking. . . ."
Mike Dyce, fansided.com: Hillary Clinton amongst those who think the Redskins should change their name
- Editorial, Washington Post: Redskins name gets even harder for Daniel Snyder to defend (July 28)
Hadas Gold, Politico: Washington Business Journal to ban 'Redskins'
- Indian Country Today Media Network: Yo, Daniel Snyder! D.C. Dumped These Demeaning 'Redskin' Images in 1958
Mike Wise, Washington Post: Time to admit: The area’s NFL team belongs to Virginia
- Hansi Lo Wang, NPR "Code Switch": At Washington's Training Camp, Fans Are Split On Name Change(July 26)