- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Snopes: Gullible, Lazy, or both?
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:30 am
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:30 am
Quite frequently I see people throw a snopes link toward an argument or debate and it’s the end all do all in their mind.
Do you think before blindly trusting a site, you would read up on the founders, how it’s run, who is doing the fact checking, is it biased, how much is opinion, political connections, etc?
It’s also lazy to run to one site and grab someone’s opinion and rush to use it as fact. I see lots of accusations from the left that the right is gullible and conspiracy freaks, yet they’re unwilling to research opposing views and challenge their own beliefs thus leaving them gullible and lazy.
We live in a world where a link is asked to provide definitive proof, however is the link any good? Do we even check? I’m sure there is a link, or multiple, to prove anyone’s point of view. Sure, they help bring some substance, but shouldn’t we rely on our own research an opinion in a link or bias from a particular site?
If you’re only consuming things that reinforce your point of view, keep you in your comfort zone, and doesn't challenge your beliefs, then you may want to consider what your digesting and seek truth, not a political point of view. Truth has no feelings and chooses no sides. This should be our focus paired with willingness to do the work to find your answers.
Do you think before blindly trusting a site, you would read up on the founders, how it’s run, who is doing the fact checking, is it biased, how much is opinion, political connections, etc?
It’s also lazy to run to one site and grab someone’s opinion and rush to use it as fact. I see lots of accusations from the left that the right is gullible and conspiracy freaks, yet they’re unwilling to research opposing views and challenge their own beliefs thus leaving them gullible and lazy.
We live in a world where a link is asked to provide definitive proof, however is the link any good? Do we even check? I’m sure there is a link, or multiple, to prove anyone’s point of view. Sure, they help bring some substance, but shouldn’t we rely on our own research an opinion in a link or bias from a particular site?
If you’re only consuming things that reinforce your point of view, keep you in your comfort zone, and doesn't challenge your beliefs, then you may want to consider what your digesting and seek truth, not a political point of view. Truth has no feelings and chooses no sides. This should be our focus paired with willingness to do the work to find your answers.
11
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:35 am to pcolatiger28
Paid propagandists and disinformation specialists
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:35 am to pcolatiger28
Snopes is liberal misinformation, have to look at the source... lol, if people quote Snopes, they lost the argument, kind of like liberals throwing out racism every time they are losing on facts...
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:37 am to pcolatiger28
Snopes has always been rock solid proof that the concept of "fact checkers" is silly
Has anyone ever really thought through what that concept implies?
Has anyone ever really thought through what that concept implies?
This post was edited on 8/1/20 at 10:38 am
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:37 am to pcolatiger28
Snopes was good when it first started up. Then soros or someone else started paying them
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:39 am to GregMaddux
quote:
nopes was good when it first started up. Then soros or someone else started paying them
They were never good. The only real difference between when they started in now is this
When they started they just did the obvious searching that some people didn't do when they saw one link from one Grandma who had forwarded it to them
But that got them the reputation as people who somehow knew better than the rest of us. From there they became the place people went to look for so-called fact-checking. At which point they just became regular people like everybody else with an opinion masquerading as people who had special insight
This post was edited on 8/1/20 at 10:41 am
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:40 am to John McClane
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/10/21 at 9:26 pm
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:42 am to ShortyRob
Snopes is hilariously bad in its full on support of international Bolshevism.
One of my favorites
Did Hilary Clinton smash her phones with a hammer?
FALSE: She didn't personally wield the hammer
Then they seque into Trump being a Russisn agent while telling you its false.
One of my favorites
Did Hilary Clinton smash her phones with a hammer?
FALSE: She didn't personally wield the hammer
Then they seque into Trump being a Russisn agent while telling you its false.
quote:
The document underlying that tidbit of information stated that “[Clinton aide Justin] Cooper did recall two instances where he destroyed Clinton’s old mobile devices by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer.”
That sentence, pulled from a 47-page document, made it into one of now-President Donald Trump’s famous Twitter tirades against a Department of Justice’s Special Counsel-led investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, which has swept up some of Trump’s circle of associates with indictments:
This post was edited on 8/1/20 at 10:45 am
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:44 am to pcolatiger28
Ignore these sources. They're all in bed with the MSM. Get your news from reliable Conservative Outlets. Folks like Liberty Daily......or Rantingly. So far, it seems TD has not been infiltrated administratively by libtards.
This post was edited on 8/1/20 at 10:48 am
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:45 am to pcolatiger28
They have some misplaced credibility in that they were the first, mainstream fact check site. They came about in an era where a catchy name and a few useful tools made or broke a site.
The reality is; Snopes is just some leftist couple polluting the internet with lies to defend democrat narratives.
This is Snopes
The reality is; Snopes is just some leftist couple polluting the internet with lies to defend democrat narratives.
This is Snopes
This post was edited on 8/1/20 at 10:48 am
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:47 am to pcolatiger28
Information is objective, until you form it into the answer you want. After seeing media distort information and presentations with symantics. I question everything.
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:48 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Snopes has always been rock solid proof that the concept of "fact checkers" is silly
Shorty, I can't wait till the heavy campaign advertising hits and the 'fact checkers' go into overdrive.
They can't just fact check Trump 100% of the time. But the Biden fact check will go like this:
Assertion: Biden's ad says that Trump has presided over the worst economy since the Great Depression.
False: It is actually the worst economy since human civilization began.
Posted on 8/1/20 at 10:50 am to pcolatiger28
Going to snopes is like reading an aggiehank post. They will say something is "false" or "true" simply based on semantics.
Posted on 8/1/20 at 11:06 am to pcolatiger28
Snopes fact checked an article in the Babylon Bee.
Posted on 8/1/20 at 11:19 am to pcolatiger28
Snopes is like 3 people, and they're on the democrat/globalist payroll.
Posted on 8/1/20 at 11:20 am to pcolatiger28
quote:
Snopes: Gullible, Lazy, or both?
Both or possibly just a programmed inability to think for oneself. People who tend to rely on Snopes are the type of people who rely on other people to tell them what to think. Aligns perfectly with both the people telling you what to think and the people needing to be told what to think (I.e., progs).
Posted on 8/1/20 at 11:26 am to GregMaddux
quote:
Snopes was good when it first started up. Then soros or someone else started paying them
They were crap from the beginning. I remember leftist nonsense from them back in 1998.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News