How much faith do you have in snopes.com ?

[DS1]

People seem to consider it the be all, end all of truth vs. fiction. I'm not so sure, I think they're starting to show an agenda.

So, lets find out if I'm the only one.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. I don't have much faith in them and here's why

They have an article debunking a claim that domestic violence rises during the superbowl. The article they used in order to debunk it was a site that was critical of the studies claiming to prove it.

Claiming there is an error in someone else's study is not de facto proof that the original claim is not true. All it does is point to a flaw in thestudy, meaning that the study used to support the claim was flawed. It does NOT then prove the claim is without merit.

On edit: I've found some of their work to be solid but much of it to be as above.

[jus_the_facts]

4. I agree...never have understood the faith so many here put into them...

....I've questioned the blind faith of their crediblity around here many times in the past when someone directed me to their site as the *end all truth* about something....amazing so many will take one site's review of something and believe it without question....s'exactly the mentality that I loathe..willfull ignorance...sigh... x(

:hi:

[joefree1]

2. Great for stopping cut-and-paste rethug chain e-mail

You're poll is slanted. There might be problems but I've had great success using Snopes.com.

http://snopes.com

My friends and family now send me any right wing propaganda they get by e-mail. On average I can usually refute the lies in twenty to thirty minutes using Snopes and similiar sources.

Amazing how the right wingers never send anymore once they've been refuted.

Other Great sites for debunking rethuglican lies
http://mediamatters.org
http://www.disinfopedia.org
http://blog.johnkerry.com/rapidresponse/
http://www.dailykos.com/
http://www.misleader.org
http://swiftvets.eriposte.com
http://bushcampaignlies.blogspot.com/
http://www.swiftboatliars.com/


Download the free PDF letter size art here:
http://www.ediablo.com/small_art2/dont_blame_me.pdf

[Fenris]

3. They seem to have an agenda now, unfortunately.

Too many people put their faith in these people.

[Floogeldy]

5. Zero

I have zero "faith" in snopes.com.

But you can look at their research and decide for yourself. Its a pretty good starting place to get to the bottom of some things.

[fortyfeetunder]

6. Supplement snopes with other research

Sometimes snopes does have credible links to substantiate their claims. And I do a bit of research on urban legends when I get them to prevent my friends from spreading them again.

[baldguy]

7. They're good for non-political stuff.

Otherwise, they have chugged the cool-aid just like every other media outlet. Consider:


Items classified as "false" which are, in fact, true -

Claim: President Bush is responsible for a 17% increase in Medicare premiums.
Status: False.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/medicare.asp

Claim: President Bush misspoke at a right-to-life rally and repeatedly said 'feces' instead of 'fetus.'
Status: False.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/fetal.asp

Claim: President George W. Bush has sponsored the creation of a Presidential Prayer Team.
Status: False.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/prayer.htm

Claim: Hoping to attract the singer's attention at the March 2002 Presidential Gala, George W. Bush waved at Stevie Wonder.
Status: False.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/bushwave.htm

Claim: President George W. Bush proclaimed, "The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur."
Status: False.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/bush.htm


Items classified as "research incomplete" or "undetermined" which are, in fact, true -

Claim: E-mail lists 'four years of George W. Bush double standards.'"
Status: Incomplete.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/numbers.asp

Claim: After a spectator at a Fourth of July celebration in Philadelphia told President Bush that he was "disappointed" with his work, the President responded, "Who cares what you think?"
Status: Undetermined.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/hangley.htm

Claim: American president George Bush asked Brazilian president Fernando Cardoso if "Brazil has blacks, too."
Status: Undetermined.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/brazil.htm

In EVERY case, unless there's overwhelming evidence to support it - they determine criticism of Bush to be false. They never go back to the original source. The "Who cares what you think?" incident is a direct quote from a first-person source with no particular axe to grind. For general historical research such a source would be believed without question, but since it's CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN BUSH that's the subject it becomes "undetermined".

edit to add link for all the GWB-related stuff listed on snopes.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/bush.asp

[DS1]

8. Nice list, definite bias in not bothering to actively find the truth on

some of the things you listed

[hunter]

9. I am wary of Snopes for a lot of reasons.

Snopes is fearless when they stomp out little lies, you know, the kind of lies you get in those stupid emails, for example, how "Ollie North warned us about Osama Bin Laden..."

But Snopes will always weasel out of refuting any BIG LIES.

For example, look at all that is missing from their George W. Bush page:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/bush.asp

The little crap is all there, but the REALLY BIG CRAP isn't.

If you put Snopes' feet to the fire, I'm certain they would claim they are entertainers rather than hard-assed investigators... sort of like Rush Limbaugh does.

And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves...(Matthew 21:12)

You will NEVER catch Snopes in the Temple overthrowing the tables of the money-changers.