The recent flap over the claim by Chris Wallace of Fox News that a debate moderator needn’t expose falsehoods has highlighted the role of the media in a charged political atmosphere.

If a debate moderator should pursue the truth, why not a newspaper? Most of the reporting in our newspapers is neutral, although often we can find “fact-check” stories in the paper if we look for them or care.

Wouldn’t it be a boon to readers if the news stories that run actually exposed lies and sought truth? Thus, instead of using vanilla verbs like “said” and “stated,” reporters who come upon obvious, verifiable attempts to deceive could themselves tell the truth. Examples:

• ” ‘In 2011, we reduced income tax from 8.5 (percent) to 7.95 (percent) and our income tax revenues went up,’ lied Gov. LePage. ‘So, higher taxes doesn’t mean more revenue.’ ”

• “In an interview, Hillary Clinton prevaricated that she and her husband ” ‘came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt.’ ”

• ” ‘Hillary Clinton is for open borders,’ fabricated Donald Trump supporter Rudy Giuliani.”

A further thought on accuracy: Newspapers have occasionally been guilty of parroting the pejorative illiteracy coined by Southern Republican politicians when referring to “the Democrat Party.” “Democrat” is a noun, as is “Republic,” not an adjective.

There is no point wailing about the impending demise of print media. Why not do something about it?

Paul Kalkstein

Arrowsic