- Sep 19, 2020
- 7,074
- 8,184
- 2,138
I contend that Snopes is not a reputable fact checking website. It is their main job, they do it poorly, and they work harder to propel a narrative that is friendly to Democrats than they do to actually determine what is true and what is false.
Here is an example. I am interested in more, and I will likely contribute more here as I come across them...
Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?
www.snopes.com
So the claim that they investigate is:
" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exaggerated the danger she was in during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, in that she "wasn't even in the Capitol building" when the rioting occurred. "
Instead of rating it mostly true, or a mixture, they rate it mostly false, and then state:
"What's True
Ocasio-Cortez wasn't in the main Capitol building where the House and Senate Chambers are located."
Included in their "fact check" are the following politically-biased statements (emphasis added):
" It took less than 48 hours for the right-wing disinformation machine to contrive a way to minimize what Ocasio-Cortez said she had experienced. "
" In a circus of cyberbullying that began on Feb. 3, 2021, conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls latched on to the misleading claim that Ocasio-Cortez “wasn’t in the Capitol building” and therefore was not in harm’s way, as she had described in the Instagram video."
To its credit, Snopes' main argument is that AOC never claimed she was in the Capitol building, which is an important point, but one example of "mostly-false right-wing disinformation" is a Red State headline, “AOC Wasn’t Even in the Capitol Building During Her ‘Near Death’ Experience.” Obviously, that headline is mostly true, arguably entirely true.
It just goes to show that you can't trust such websites. Wikipedia is also full of political bias these days. Their page on the Capitol riot reads like something CNN would put together.
Truth and facts are becoming harder to come by these days. When you have to fact check the fact checkers, things are pretty bad.
And social media companies will use "fact checks" like these to make censorship decisions, so they aren't simply "alternative viewpoints" on the internet; they have real-world First Amendment implications. (Please don't lecture me about private companies being able to make their own rules, I know.)
Here is an example. I am interested in more, and I will likely contribute more here as I come across them...
Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?
Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?
AOC was targeted with another round of bad-faith smears after giving an emotional account of her experiences during the Capitol riot.
www.snopes.com
So the claim that they investigate is:
" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exaggerated the danger she was in during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, in that she "wasn't even in the Capitol building" when the rioting occurred. "
Instead of rating it mostly true, or a mixture, they rate it mostly false, and then state:
"What's True
Ocasio-Cortez wasn't in the main Capitol building where the House and Senate Chambers are located."
Included in their "fact check" are the following politically-biased statements (emphasis added):
" It took less than 48 hours for the right-wing disinformation machine to contrive a way to minimize what Ocasio-Cortez said she had experienced. "
" In a circus of cyberbullying that began on Feb. 3, 2021, conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls latched on to the misleading claim that Ocasio-Cortez “wasn’t in the Capitol building” and therefore was not in harm’s way, as she had described in the Instagram video."
To its credit, Snopes' main argument is that AOC never claimed she was in the Capitol building, which is an important point, but one example of "mostly-false right-wing disinformation" is a Red State headline, “AOC Wasn’t Even in the Capitol Building During Her ‘Near Death’ Experience.” Obviously, that headline is mostly true, arguably entirely true.
It just goes to show that you can't trust such websites. Wikipedia is also full of political bias these days. Their page on the Capitol riot reads like something CNN would put together.
Truth and facts are becoming harder to come by these days. When you have to fact check the fact checkers, things are pretty bad.
And social media companies will use "fact checks" like these to make censorship decisions, so they aren't simply "alternative viewpoints" on the internet; they have real-world First Amendment implications. (Please don't lecture me about private companies being able to make their own rules, I know.)
