SNOPES

[resident_evil]

 

[resident_evil]

 

[resident_evil]

Left slanted editor

 

[middleview]

The article you've provided has no evidence that the Mikelsons ever post false information. It is also old news. The Mikelsons are divorced. The Snopes site lists how many people are on staff. If you go to the Reader's digest article it actually describes in great detail just exactly why the website is so well regarded. What you have posted is from a guy who didn't like that his anti-Obama article was flagged as false by Snopes.

 

[middleview]

Left slanted editor

View attachment 37191

You continue to attack the people because you can't attack the facts they publish. Sucks to be you. Christian Science Monitor and NPR are very good and very balanced sources of information. You can argue all you like about CNN or CBS, but at least she never worked for Fox, Brietbart, Info Wars, the New York Post or the Washington Times...

 

[resident_evil]

What, no office address or phone number on the contact page?



http://www.snopes.com/contact/

 

[resident_evil]

You continue to attack the people because you can't attack the facts they publish. Sucks to be you. Christian Science Monitor and NPR are very good and very balanced sources of information. You can argue all you like about CNN or CBS, but at least she never worked for Fox, Brietbart, Info Wars, the New York Post or the Washington Times...

Sucks to be you because you've asked for a background check on snopes and in time this thread will fully thresh them out.

 

[resident_evil]

Snopes personnel are not supposed to have a slant.



And yet... I see a slant brewing on the very top tweet for their managing editor.





https://www.politicaljack.com/threads/snopes.104483/#post-1946334

 

[EatTheRich]

Left slanted editor

View attachment 37191

Wow, this contradicts your top post. I guess if facts don't matter you can post whatever you want.

 

[resident_evil]

Wow, this contradicts your top post. I guess if facts don't matter you can post whatever you want.

What the hell are you trying to say?

 

[JackDallas]

View attachment 37190

They don't really need a research department since all their findings come right out of their demented Liberal pea-size brains.

 

[EatTheRich]

What the hell are you trying to say?

That you have so little regard for the truth that you don't care when one lie or half-truth contradicts the next.

 

[JackDallas]

You continue to attack the people because you can't attack the facts they publish. Sucks to be you. Christian Science Monitor and NPR are very good and very balanced sources of information. You can argue all you like about CNN or CBS, but at least she never worked for Fox, Brietbart, Info Wars, the New York Post or the Washington Times...

NPR, the RED* spot on your dial.

* Commies

 

[resident_evil]

That you have so little regard for the truth that you don't care when one lie or half-truth contradicts the next.

Yeah, you're still going to have to make the point like you've got one.

And lies and half-truthts? I give you your communist apologetics posts here ad infinitum.

 

[EatTheRich]

Yeah, you're still going to have to make the point like you've got one.

And lies and half-truthts? I give you your communist apologetics posts here ad infinitum.

Feel free to point out a specific lie. Here's how it works:

Post #1: you say that Barbara and David Mikkelson are "the whole organization."
Post #3: you say that Brooke Binkowski is a "left-slanted editor."
The obvious contradiction: if Snopes employs Binkowski, then the Mikkelsons are not "the whole organization."
The inevitable conclusion: at least one of these posts is untrue, and you are either so sloppy with the truth or so dishonest that this obvious contradiction doesn't stop you from making these posts ... aimed, I might add, at discrediting a fact-checking organization because it interferes with your ability to propagate lies unchallenged.

 

[EatTheRich]

Left slanted editor

View attachment 37191

Btw, the Globe & Mail was very much right-leaning last time I checked.

 

[resident_evil]

Feel free to point out a specific lie. Here's how it works:

Post #1: you say that Barbara and David Mikkelson are "the whole organization."
Post #3: you say that Brooke Binkowski is a "left-slanted editor."
The obvious contradiction: if Snopes employs Binkowski, then the Mikkelsons are not "the whole organization."
The inevitable conclusion: at least one of these posts is untrue, and you are either so sloppy with the truth or so dishonest that this obvious contradiction doesn't stop you from making these posts ... aimed, I might add, at discrediting a fact-checking organization because it interferes with your ability to propagate lies unchallenged.

You missed middleviews opinion on another thread that precipitated this one. And it seems the last time I checked on them years ago they were two bats in a trailer. Now they are said to have crowd funded for $500k a couple of years ago and the list of staff seems to be full of recent hires dating to that funding drive.

 

[resident_evil]

Btw, the Globe & Mail was very much right-leaning last time I checked.

I wouldn't know about which Globe or Mail is in question.

But you should check out her twitter. It leans left.

 

[Jen]

No one with any brains has believed Snopes in a very long time.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

The article you've provided has no evidence that the Mikelsons ever post false information. It is also old news. The Mikelsons are divorced. The Snopes site lists how many people are on staff. If you go to the Reader's digest article it actually describes in great detail just exactly why the website is so well regarded. What you have posted is from a guy who didn't like that his anti-Obama article was flagged as false by Snopes.

I've personally busted Snopes for lying twice.