The network scorecards were designed to provide you a way to measure the relative truth of statements made on a particular network.The other corner:
We avoid comparisons between the networks.PunditFact breaks down its data to enable its readers to "measure the relative truth of statements made on a particular network."
At the same time, PunditFact tells its readers that it's not comparing the networks.
We're still trying to figure out a way these claims can reconcile without contradiction and/or excusing PolitiFact from the charge of deliberately misleading its readers.
If the scorecards provide readers with a legitimate tool for judging the relative truth of statements made on a particular network, then why would PunditFact avoid comparisons between the networks? And how can PunditFact even claim to avoid making comparisons between the networks when its scorecards avowedly serve the purpose of leading readers to make those comparisons?
If this paradox doesn't indicate simple ignorance on PunditFact's part, it indicates a disturbingly disingenuous approach to its subject matter.