Snopes caught lying and deceiving readers

[RVonse]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with.

POTUS Trump was actually right when he regularly complained about much of today's fake news. He just should have cautioned us about the fake fact checkers like Snopes as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/business/media/snopes-plagiarism-David-Mikkelson.html

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with. From now on, I'm going to figure that the tabloids are more accurate than Snopes. With Facebook and Google running a close 2nd and 3rd on impartiality.

IMHO there is probably NO source of valid news or fact checking anymore. Consider everything a lie or compromised in some political way. The best you can do is to expose yourself to as many different sources of material and figure that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. That is what today's journalism is worth to myself.

 

[Elixir]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with.

POTUS Trump was actually right when he regularly complained about much of today's fake news. He just should have cautioned us about the fake fact checkers like Snopes as well.

IMHO there is probably NO source of valid news or fact checking anymore. Consider everything a lie or compromised in some political way. The best you can do is to expose yourself to as many different sources of material and figure that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. That is what today's journalism is worth to myself.

Pay attention! Orango DID lie about fact checkers just like he lied about MSM and even FOX when they started telling the truth to avoid liability suits.
Snopes is good, but it helps to also read what other reputable fact check sites say about things before assuming they got everything right. Just like it’s good to see what NPR is saying before assuming that OAN and NewsMax are lying again, even though that’s a very safe bet.
No surprise that you are immune to facts, though. That’s the main thrust of Republican and Russian propaganda, which you obviously buy in bulk. That softens up your brain to accept the word of a moron who was proven to have lied over thirty thousand time in four years.
Linking to YouTube as a source regarding fact checkers, is another blatant tell.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with.

Snopes isn't an online oracle. They usually back up the claims with citations and links.

POTUS Trump was actually right when he regularly complained about much of today's fake news.

You misunderstood what Trump meant by "fake news".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/business/media/snopes-plagiarism-David-Mikkelson.html

Okay, you are complaining about Fake News while providing some yourself. This isn't about accuracy, this is about plagiarism of which doesn't impact the research and calls on any particular claim, as per what I noted above. Don't trust Snopes because it is Snopes, trust it when the citations check.

This Fake News was brought to you by RVonse.

 

[untermensche]

POTUS Trump was actually right when he regularly complained about much of today's fake news. He just should have cautioned us about the fake fact checkers like Snopes as well.

If POS Trump ever got anything right it was a mistake.

Trump lied and lied and lied.

And complained about fake news.

 

[KeepTalking]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with.

POTUS Trump was actually right when he regularly complained about much of today's fake news. He just should have cautioned us about the fake fact checkers like Snopes as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/business/media/snopes-plagiarism-David-Mikkelson.html

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with. From now on, I'm going to figure that the tabloids are more accurate than Snopes. With Facebook and Google running a close 2nd and 3rd on impartiality.

IMHO there is probably NO source of valid news or fact checking anymore. Consider everything a lie or compromised in some political way. The best you can do is to expose yourself to as many different sources of material and figure that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. That is what today's journalism is worth to myself.

Just here to add to the chorus of voices you will ignore who let you know that this has nothing to do with the accuracy of Snopes when fact checking, but rather plagiarism by copying language from news outlets without proper attribution.

If POS Trump ever got anything right, it was purely by accident. He was the biggest source of fake news during his shit show of an administration.

 

[RVonse]

Snopes isn't an online oracle. They usually back up the claims with citations and links.

What? The first thing they bring to you is their meter telling true or false. What good are false claims and citations that back up their meter?

Okay, you are complaining about Fake News while providing some yourself. This isn't about accuracy, this is about plagiarism of which doesn't impact the research and calls on any particular claim, as per what I noted above. Don't trust Snopes because it is Snopes, trust it when the citations check.

This Fake News was brought to you by RVonse.

There are many many other sources from google that bring this same message if you bother to look. I am only the messenger of this news which (in this case) does not fit your political narrative.

 

[RVonse]

Snopes is good, but it helps to also read what other reputable fact check sites say about things before assuming they got everything right.

But the point is this. They are politically biased just like facebook, google, twitter, and the rest. They might seem good if they bring non political truth to the table but how do you trust these organizations when they have a political ax to grind?

The answer is that you can't. If you prefer just to feed your dopamine receptors, continue on believing Snopes like Jimmy and others. But it is not reality, they are in fact a political organization.

 

[RVonse]

If POS Trump ever got anything right, it was purely by accident. He was the biggest source of fake news during his shit show of an administration.

I can not defend that other than to say that Trump wasn't performing a role other than a politician and business as usual. Snope OTOH advertised as being the ultimate arbitrator of the facts. It was their reason to exist.

 

[RVonse]

Just here to add to the chorus of voices you will ignore who let you know that this has nothing to do with the accuracy of Snopes when fact checking, but rather plagiarism by copying language from news outlets without proper attribution.

In order to fulfill their political mission. That is the point.

 

[Toni]

Snopes is good, but it helps to also read what other reputable fact check sites say about things before assuming they got everything right.

But the point is this. They are politically biased just like facebook, google, twitter, and the rest. They might seem good if they bring non political truth to the table but how do you trust these organizations when they have a political ax to grind?

The answer is that you can't. If you continue to feed your dopamine receptors, continue on believing Snopes like Jimmy and others. But it is not reality.

Are you kidding? Facebook is biased towards $$, not towards any political side. Twitter, as well, but honestly, you do have a lot of choice about what shows up in your feed. I follow a bunch of (extremely conservative) people I knew in high school and if I only looked at what they post and link and like and follow, I'd swear that FB was somewhere right of Fox, which a not unconsiderable number now distrust since it doesn't always do nothing but suck up to Trump anymore but sometimes actually...reports.

I do think it is important to know the biases and attitudes of whatever news outlet you subscribe to. For myself, I rarely every watch any news, beyond sometimes catching something on PBS--or when there's threatening weather. Aside from that, I have my long trusted news sources that were well respected 40+ years ago when part of my job in DC involved following news of a particular subject, as reported in major news outlets all over the country. I've added a couple and I rarely read much on some of them anymore, mostly because I don't need to do so.

 

[Toni]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with.

POTUS Trump was actually right when he regularly complained about much of today's fake news. He just should have cautioned us about the fake fact checkers like Snopes as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wxk8SX8z14
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/business/media/snopes-plagiarism-David-Mikkelson.html

On many of the forums I frequent, Snopes was/is always the fact checking bible that everyone runs to settle an argument. But Snopes themselves are a proven dishonest lying organization to begin with. From now on, I'm going to figure that the tabloids are more accurate than Snopes. With Facebook and Google running a close 2nd and 3rd on impartiality.

IMHO there is probably NO source of valid news or fact checking anymore. Consider everything a lie or compromised in some political way. The best you can do is to expose yourself to as many different sources of material and figure that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. That is what today's journalism is worth to myself.

Google???????

Do you know how algorithms work?????

 

[untermensche]

Go to DemocracyNow.

No corporate spin. No agenda. No ulterior motives.

Just the facts as best they can be ascertained.

 

[Rhea]

From now on, I'm going to figure that the tabloids are more accurate than Snopes. With Facebook and Google running a close 2nd and 3rd on impartiality.

IMHO there is probably NO source of valid news or fact checking anymore. Consider everything a lie or compromised in some political way. The best you can do is to expose yourself to as many different sources of material and figure that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Why the middle?

Let me ask you this: who benefits from you deciding that all news sources are invalid?
1) The people who tell the truth
2) the people who lie on purpose

Corruption lives in darkness. You have just proclaimed your intent to purposely live in darkness.

I find the news sources and fact checkers, who provide the background sources and analysis, with reasons for why they conclude as they do, to be a good start. Their analyses usually comport with their shared source material.

I find the ones shrieking to distrust everyone to be most often fundamentally - and deliberately - wrong.

 

[KeepTalking]

If POS Trump ever got anything right, it was purely by accident. He was the biggest source of fake news during his shit show of an administration.

I can not defend that other than to say that Trump wasn't performing a role other than a politician and business as usual.

Not sure it is quite business as usual, but at least you can tell that he is an unabashed liar, so we agree on that point. It's always nice to find common ground.

Snope OTOH advertised as being the ultimate arbitrator of the facts. It was their reason to exist.

A small bit of hyperbole there, but yes, they bill themselves as a fact checker. What in this reporting is it that informs you that they were factually incorrect in the articles that were retracted?

Just here to add to the chorus of voices you will ignore who let you know that this has nothing to do with the accuracy of Snopes when fact checking, but rather plagiarism by copying language from news outlets without proper attribution.

In order to fulfill their political mission. That is the point.

I see nothing in the reporting about a political mission, either.

Please explain what you think their political mission is, how you came to that understanding, and how the articles in question fulfill that mission.

 

[bilby]

Trump says "2+2=6"

Snopes says "False! According to our fact checkers, and the American Mathematical Society, 2+2=4".

What is a person to do? Who should we believe?

RVonse to the rescue! The truth must fall in the middle. We need to seek out news sources that we know we can trust; And we will recognise such trustworthy sources, because they will be reporting that 2+2=5.

How fortunate we are to have such a powerful and effective epistemology on which to depend. Nobody's going to fool us now!

 

[funinspace]

RVonse should start citing funinspace, as he is the SMARTEST SMARTASS

 

[funinspace]

"Snopes caught lying and deceiving readers" - the plagiarism in question wasn't part of their fact checking, it was one guy, though a co-founder. Just imagine Fox's Hannity or Carlson fixing such an issue as Snopes already has and agreeing that was happened was bad and wrong...not.

 

[laughing dog]

Anyone else struck by the irony of the OP that equates misattribution of authorship with lying about facts?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Go to DemocracyNow.

No corporate spin. No agenda. No ulterior motives.

Just the facts as best they can be ascertained.

Keyword: "corporate".

Doesn't mean there isn't other spin.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Anyone else struck by the irony of the OP that equates misattribution of authorship with lying about facts?

Struck but not shocked.