So Much For SNOPES "research"

Joined
Mar 31, 2004
Messages
1,757
Reaction score
1,483
Location
Rural, CT
Hmmmm....and here I thought the site was legitimate. But
still...like the guy noted at the bottom....do your own
research...don't just read an email and assume that it is true. Do a
little research on the web to find out if it is or not...if you're
that interested in it.


Subject: So Much For SNOPES "research"
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 17:41:48 +0000



For the past few years www.snopes.com < http://www.snopes.com/> has
positioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell-all final
word' on any comment, claim and email.

But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was
behind snopes.com < http://snopes.com/> . Only recently did Wikipedia
get to the bottom of it - kinda makes you wonder what they were
hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team
- that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no
team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a
hobby.

David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California
started the website about 13 years ago - and they have no formal
background or experience in investigative research. After a few
years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral,
but over the past couple of years people started asking questions
who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation? The reason
for the questions - or skepticisms - is a result of snopes.com
< http://snopes.com/> claiming to have the bottom line facts to
certain questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong.
Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really
investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues.

A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville
hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big
splash across the internet, 'supposedly' the Mikkelson's claim to
have researched this issue before posting their findings on
snopes.com < http://snopes.com/> . In their statement they claimed
the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down
the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever' took place.

I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me)
thinking he would want to get to the bottom of this and I gave him
Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers - and Bud was going to give him
phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would
have been willing to speak with him about it. He never called Bud.
In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg no one from snopes.com
< http://snopes.com/> ever contacted anyone with State Farm.
Yet,snopes.com < http://snopes.com/> issued a statement as the 'final
factual word' on the issue as if they did all their homework and got
to the bottom of things - not!

Then it has been learned the Mikkelson's are very Democratic (party)
and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential
election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that
appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately
over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson's
liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee, what a
shock?

So, I say this now to everyone who goes to www.snopes.com
< http://www.snopes.com/> to get what they think to be the bottom
line facts...'proceed with caution.' Take what it says at face value
and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where
you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus, you can
always google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems
apparent that's all the Mikkelson's do. After all, I can personally
vouch from my own experience for their 'not' fully looking into things.
_
_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snopes.com
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snopes.com>
 
Register to hide this ad
Hmmmm....and here I thought the site was legitimate. But
still...like the guy noted at the bottom....do your own
research...don't just read an email and assume that it is true. Do a
little research on the web to find out if it is or not...if you're
that interested in it.


Subject: So Much For SNOPES "research"
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 17:41:48 +0000



For the past few years www.snopes.com < http://www.snopes.com/> has
positioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell-all final
word' on any comment, claim and email.

But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was
behind snopes.com < http://snopes.com/> . Only recently did Wikipedia
get to the bottom of it - kinda makes you wonder what they were
hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team
- that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no
team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a
hobby.

David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California
started the website about 13 years ago - and they have no formal
background or experience in investigative research. After a few
years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral,
but over the past couple of years people started asking questions
who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation? The reason
for the questions - or skepticisms - is a result of snopes.com
< http://snopes.com/> claiming to have the bottom line facts to
certain questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong.
Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really
investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues.

A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville
hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big
splash across the internet, 'supposedly' the Mikkelson's claim to
have researched this issue before posting their findings on
snopes.com < http://snopes.com/> . In their statement they claimed
the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down
the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever' took place.

I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me)
thinking he would want to get to the bottom of this and I gave him
Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers - and Bud was going to give him
phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would
have been willing to speak with him about it. He never called Bud.
In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg no one from snopes.com
< http://snopes.com/> ever contacted anyone with State Farm.
Yet,snopes.com < http://snopes.com/> issued a statement as the 'final
factual word' on the issue as if they did all their homework and got
to the bottom of things - not!

Then it has been learned the Mikkelson's are very Democratic (party)
and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential
election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that
appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately
over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson's
liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee, what a
shock?

So, I say this now to everyone who goes to www.snopes.com
< http://www.snopes.com/> to get what they think to be the bottom
line facts...'proceed with caution.' Take what it says at face value
and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where
you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus, you can
always google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems
apparent that's all the Mikkelson's do. After all, I can personally
vouch from my own experience for their 'not' fully looking into things.
_
_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snopes.com
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snopes.com>
 
You can't believe much of anything you read on Wikipedia, either.
icon_wink.gif


It's the internet. Anyone can say anything, and insist that it's true. They can even say that the President insists it's true, whether he does or not. Take everything you read (especially if it's posted by Sip or me) with a grain of sand. Do more research. Maybe even crack a book.

I sure hope the "younger" generation is reading this.
 
I think Snopes makes an honest attempt to confirm or deny different things. Everything I look up there has been sourced with hyperlinks in most cases. I would tend to consider them more credible on that basis than to be suspicious because of a missed phone call. I would add that one's party affiliation is not by itself evidence of truth or falsity.

I'm with Sip, sorta, on this one.
 
It also shouldn't take a genius to figure out who runs snopes. Their names are all over their website.
icon_rolleyes.gif
I can't imagine anyone actually being gullible enough to think there was a team of highly trained investigators running the site.

I've always used them, plus do my own research/investigating when I'm not convinced of their answers. So far, they have won out, on most occasions, as being a true answer.

They aren't the end all, be all either. There's plenty of other sites to check facts and get links. truthorfiction.com, breakthechain.org and a few others are out there providing information.
 
I always thought that if is was on the internet, then it must be true. Just like it is for TV.
 
"Maybe even crack a book."

What about a book on crack?

Seriously folks I've found Snopes usually gets it right but they are by no means the only source. As noted above, do your homework, check your sources and if all else fails call Al Gore. (o;
 
The only problem I have seen so far is that Snope's main source for any Obama questions seems to be the Obama administration. I think that gets to the heart of Warren's post.
 
Originally posted by Forester:
The only problem I have seen so far is that Snope's main source for any Obama questions seems to be the Obama administration. I think that gets to the heart of Warren's post.


Conspiracy ! Conspiracy !!!


Just my view from the grassy knoll
icon_wink.gif
 
You mean I might not get the earnest money that I sent to Somolia, plus ten million dollars back when professor Sendoji gets out of prison?
 
I used to rely on them quite frequently, but based on some of their responses to political issues I can definitely see some left leanings. As an example, I wanted to find out the "truth" about Pelosi's jet. When you read snopes they make it sound like it was practically forced on her against her will. A simple google search turns up many article by mainstream publications (respected and otherwise) that all quote her as not only requesting, but attempting to justify why she needed it.

I have always maintained that given their obvious bias and people's reliance on snopes, that one day snopes will post that the story of Teddy K. getting drunk, driving off a bridge in Chappaquiddick and suffocating (not drowning, read the actual account) a woman to death is <span class="ev_code_RED">false</span>.
 
I not only use Snopes, but also Urban legends.About.
This is all untrue.

Summary: Forwarded email alleges that the urban legend debunking site Snopes.com is 'owned by a flaming liberal' who is 'in the tank for Obama' and cannot be trusted to provide reliable information.

Description: Email rumor
Circulating since: Oct. 2008
Status: False

So don't believe everything you read in your emails.
 
Further rationale to never rely on only one source for confirmation of information. I do like Snopes for the 'routine' e-mail garbage, that originated as faxes back when, that people still insist on forwarding.

Boomstick, do you MEAN that the story about the Somali Prof is false??? Cr*p!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top