Survey Finds Too Many People Believe Snopes Is A Legitimate Fact-Checking Website

Mar 2015
29,758
15,248
Mad Prophet
#21
What makes you so sure? Snopes has been producing some blatantly biased fact checks recently that try to work around objective truth.
Please demonstrate this bias. Name an incident where Snopes deliberately has misled its audience.

I'm curious to not only see how far they have gone, but how often they are actually wrong.

Come on, Mcduff - step up to bat. Going to toss this one right over the plate....
 
Aug 2018
3,232
5,229
Vancouver
#23
What makes you so sure? Snopes has been producing some blatantly biased fact checks recently that try to work around objective truth.
As I said above - the key to intellectual and personal integrity is to constantly change your mind when confronted with new information.

If they've screwed the pooch, or have changed in some way, I'm all ears.

In fact, I'd like to know.

If CNN can change from the world's best tv news source to a steaming pile of rancid dog shit in ten years.... Anything's possible.
 
Likes: labrea
Mar 2015
29,758
15,248
Mad Prophet
#24
As I said above - the key to intellectual and personal integrity is to constantly change your mind when confronted with new information.

If they've screwed the pooch, or have changed in some way, I'm all ears.

In fact, I'd like to know.

If CNN can change from the world's best tv news source to a steaming pile of rancid dog shit in ten years.... Anything's possible.
I agree and if Macduff makes a compelling case for what he is saying, I'm all ears.
 
Jul 2013
56,958
62,456
Nashville, TN
#25
When both sides think you are totally biased to the other side, you are doing something right.


Comments on Snopes site:

I used to read your site all the time. It soon became apparent that anything that was there political, you people would swing to the looney lieral view on everything. It is a shame but I cannot trust you on any of your information any more, as you are too left leaning so as to give false information.








You are all dumbass republicans that want to control everything. You couldn’t win a fair fight if it was clear air. Pick on who you want but leave names out unless you actually talk to and that person agrees with you. Hide behind your shield as all cowards do. You all lost, accept it. I’m pretty confident some one will make your day soon.





how come you only review/submit/comment on subjects that show the liberal/socialist agenda as positive/ good. Never seen you say anything against the left. Isn’t that biased reporting?





It’s also obvious that your site is biased and is pro Republican which does not make you qualified to give the rest of us who aren’t a satisfactory answer about anything especially regarding politics. You can not be BIASED but objective.





I will never trust your fact-checking site in the future. Your blatant liberal bias is and your disingenuous answers are a travesty to anyone looking for information about events. I will never recommend your site to anyone looking to find the truth about circulated information, and I will add an addendum to any e-mails that reference your site cautioning them against your bias and views.





Not that you would tell me, but I will ask any way. Are you anti-Obama or just another bias Republican? I read your crap about him and the First Lady surrendering their law licenses and was surprised at your insinuating their was some corruption.





I noticed you lean toward a liberal prespective on articles. You also seem to defend the useless president sitting in office.





It’s always a great service when myths and misinformation are exposed. Truth and fact can be a rare commodity. However, your site are disappointing and lack credibility. You show a very right-wing bias which casts a shadow on any attempt at truth seeking. When one considers the current assualt on democracy, the constitution and freedom by the Bush Regime and their extreme right-wing supporters, it is truly a shame that your motives and choices are suspect.





You can print all the left wing spin you want for your Demo buddies but that will not change facts. Can we now believe anything you write on this site ??? I’ll look elsewhere.





After spending several hours on your most excellent website, I am struck with the notion that you are extremely defensive on the matter of George Bush and tend to lay blame on Bill Clinton where possible. Now perhaps I am reading between the lines, or perhaps you are simply telling it like it is, but one must wonder how candidly you report the “facts.”

Is snopes.com biased?
 

Macduff

Moderator
Apr 2010
96,701
33,650
Pittsburgh, PA
#26
Please offer examples.
OK here's one. Marches by Rival Groups Lead to Clashes; 3 People Arrested
Snopes can't be bothered to do a google search to verify the man's employment and they treat an attack caught on video as if it were he said she said.

Or another. Does an Image Show Ocasio-Cortez Fake-Crying at a Migrant Camp?
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortex was caught putting on a big emotional display at the sight of a... parking lot. She clearly only chose to show pictures that cut off what was in her line of sight and even in the pictures she displayed, the people in the background are pretty nonplussed while she simulates an emotional breakdown. And what was Snopes' big reveal to justify their "false" rating? There was a building there too.

Or this one. Did Nathan Phillips Falsely Claim He Was a Vietnam Veteran?
Despite Phillips falsely claiming on video to be a Vietnam veteran, Snopes still tries to vindicate him. The mental gymnastics are amazing to watch. Whenever Phillips said he was a Vietnam vet, Snopes says the writer misinterpreted him. When someone writes that Phillips was a Vietnam vet, Snopes says that Phillips was using vague language and was misunderstood. All that just so they can avoid having to label an objective fact: Phillips is not a Vietnam veteran.
This vendetta that Snopes has with the Babylon Bee is bizarre. Babylon Bee openly calls itself satire. "Your Trusted Source for Christian News Satire". Snopes acts like they're actively trying to deceive people. The Onion calls itself "America's Finest News Source". Everyone knows that's a goof. But you don't see Snopes treating them like they're some kind of Russian troll farm trying to plant fake news stories in the media. Snopes fact checks of Babylon Bee are full of editorializing and accusatory statements. "fanning the flames of controversy", "muddying the details of a news story", "attempt to maximize the online indignation", "has managed to fool readers". This is the language a so-called objective fact checker uses? They've updated the piece since then but only because they were called out for it.
 
Likes: orangecat
Mar 2015
29,758
15,248
Mad Prophet
#27
OK here's one. Marches by Rival Groups Lead to Clashes; 3 People Arrested
Snopes can't be bothered to do a google search to verify the man's employment and they treat an attack caught on video as if it were he said she said.

Or another. Does an Image Show Ocasio-Cortez Fake-Crying at a Migrant Camp?
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortex was caught putting on a big emotional display at the sight of a... parking lot. She clearly only chose to show pictures that cut off what was in her line of sight and even in the pictures she displayed, the people in the background are pretty nonplussed while she simulates an emotional breakdown. And what was Snopes' big reveal to justify their "false" rating? There was a building there too.

Or this one. Did Nathan Phillips Falsely Claim He Was a Vietnam Veteran?
Despite Phillips falsely claiming on video to be a Vietnam veteran, Snopes still tries to vindicate him. The mental gymnastics are amazing to watch. Whenever Phillips said he was a Vietnam vet, Snopes says the writer misinterpreted him. When someone writes that Phillips was a Vietnam vet, Snopes says that Phillips was using vague language and was misunderstood. All that just so they can avoid having to label an objective fact: Phillips is not a Vietnam veteran.
This vendetta that Snopes has with the Babylon Bee is bizarre. Babylon Bee openly calls itself satire. "Your Trusted Source for Christian News Satire". Snopes acts like they're actively trying to deceive people. The Onion calls itself "America's Finest News Source". Everyone knows that's a goof. But you don't see Snopes treating them like they're some kind of Russian troll farm trying to plant fake news stories in the media. Snopes fact checks of Babylon Bee are full of editorializing and accusatory statements. "fanning the flames of controversy", "muddying the details of a news story", "attempt to maximize the online indignation", "has managed to fool readers". This is the language a so-called objective fact checker uses? They've updated the piece since then but only because they were called out for it.
I agree with Snopes about Nathan Phillips - he was actually considered to be a Vietnam vet. If you served during the war, even if you did not go overseas, you are indeed a Vietnam vet.

It's a matter of conjecture as to whether or not AOC actually shed tears - not sure how you could prove that.
 
Likes: Friday13
Jul 2013
56,958
62,456
Nashville, TN
#28
My best friend was an Engineering officer on a Navy Supply ship, they made two trips to Vietnam's Cam Ranh Bay harbor to unload supplies, was there a couple of days each time. Does that make him a Vietnam Veteran? Had another friend that was an engineering officer on a nuke submarine, sailed off the coast of China and Vietnam, but never made port, Vietnam vet?
 
Likes: Friday13