|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|
The truth is I don't know. It depends on which google search you read about Snopes. I know they have made some mistakes regarding what is true and what is false. They are reported to be somewhat biased toward the left, but other websites say that isn't true either.
This one is up in the air but I always use several different sources of "truth" before I draw any conclusions. I doubt there is any so called fact checking source that is 100% reliable.
Its my opinion they are a blatant lefty apologetics site. Tactics of poisoning the well, ad hom, anything it takes to discredit a source as opposed to finding truth.
It may seem blatant to a discerning person like you Phoenix but much of it is subtle and can pass as objective to the average person. Of course to the loony left wingers they will accept anything as truth long as it agrees with their view.
devalue true facts from conservative sources and share the silence of subjects the left doesn't report that allows the issues to be flagged as fake because it isn't verified against liberal sources.
They are definitely sharing the same biases that caused the left leaning news sites to not report Clinton's corruption, health problems, true bad state of the economy. End result - they inflate the "truth" rating of propaganda, devalue true facts from conservative sources and share the silence of subjects the left doesn't report that allows the issues to be flagged as fake because it isn't verified against liberal sources.
We have European and American news sites not reporting anything that hurts the liberal narrative, no matter the negative impact on society.
It’s not only Germany that covers up mass sex attacks by migrant men... Sweden’s record is shameful
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/its- … -shameful/
Report buried Trump-related ‘hate crimes’ against white kids
http://nypost.com/2016/12/05/report-bur … te-crimes-
German State Media Defends Not Reporting Girl Raped and Murdered by ‘Refugee’
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/12 … pe-murder/
Or in the truly insane cases, refusing to report the racial description of terrorists out of fear that doing so is labeled racist. This has led to true atrocities enabled by liberal silence.
Why Did British Police Ignore Muslim Gangs Abusing 1,400 Rotherham Children?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerscruto … 77812f5a7c
Professionals blamed Oxfordshire girls for their sexual abuse (by Muslim rape gangs), report finds
https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 … port-finds
The amount of fallacies that snopes uses when doing their liberal apologetics is staggering. When something is true about a liberal, but that truth shows the liberal in a negative light, they go on a campaign to discredit the source.
What would be your basis to definitively, and accurately make that assessment? What are your tools to analyze, and validate their answers to questions?
Isn't it a lot like copying exam answers off the person in front of you when you don't have your own correct answer?
What is your litmus test for veracity?
Take the allegation that Russia won the election for Trump. Where is the evidence, how is it evaluated and actually traced to a Sine Qua Non to Russia. Some facts would be helpful. We know some facts.
CA, IL and NY voters were not in the least deviated from voting for Hillary Clinton. So what kind of mechanism can target just a few states, and not others. How did Russia or anyone get in the heads of voters to vote for Trump, yet not in democrat stronghold states?
How would Snopes find the truth? What resources do they have, and certainly unnamed intelligence sources without hard facts and evidence is just hearsay, or rumors.
The solution is that we need to recreate the real news agencies of the past. You know when Journalism was real, and news was reporting the events, rather than coloring it with opinions, and guesses.
We don't have NEWS anymore, so it is all fake by definition.
Snopes and politifact are a "protective layer" for the liberal media machine. Simple to say "blah blah blah is "verified" by an outside source." It's how they keep their sheep from straying too far from the plantation. There is no such thing as an unbiased source today; doubtful that there ever will be.
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter9 months ago
Evan mullins gave four suggestions:1. Examine the source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f … s_websites Did you you know some sources are spoofing to make it seem like...
by ahorseback12 months ago
In my usual morning news media fix , I clock on to CBS , CNN , MSNBC , The Hill , Fox , the Drudge , ABC , . One would have to be a total moron to not be able to read into today's news media as a collective...
by PhoenixV8 months ago
Is CNN a fake news site?
by Mike Russo16 months ago
Well up until this time, I had a hard time trying to differentiate fake news from real news. However now that Trump has posted this tweet, at least I have something to go by. O.K. so Fake News, according to...
by Randy Godwin4 months ago
As the Mueller investigation homes in on Donald Trump and his alleged collusion with our longtime adversary, namely Russia, it's come to light only Trump's advisor prevented him from firing Robert Mueller. Among the...
by Timothy Arends2 months ago
It’s always worrying when an Internet property you participate in is bought out by another entity, and the acquisition of hubpages is no exception. In the past, I have seen the philosophy and concept of a...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.