The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated) (Read 22714 times)

passivekinetic

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #40 on: November 13, 2016, 10:52:30 PM »
CONFIRMED!!!!!

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fact-checking-snopes-websites-political-fact-checker-is-just-a-failed-liberal-blogger/

Fact-Checking Snopes: Website’s Political ‘Fact-Checker’ Is Just A Failed Liberal Blogger

Popular myth-busting website Snopes originally gained recognition for being the go-to site for disproving outlandish urban legends -such as the presence of UFOs in Haiti or the existence of human-animal hybrids in the Amazon jungle.

Recently, however, the site has tried to pose as a political fact-checker. But Snopes’ “fact-checking” looks more like playing defense for prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton and it’s political “fact-checker” describes herself as a liberal and has called Republicans “regressive” and afraid of “female agency.”

Snopes’ main political fact-checker is a writer named Kim Lacapria. Before writing for Snopes, Lacapria wrote for Inquisitr, a blog that — oddly enough — is known for publishing fake quotes and even downright hoaxes as much as anything else.

While at Inquisitr, the future “fact-checker” consistently displayed clear partisanship (RELATED: Snopes Caught Lying About Lack Of American Flags At Democratic Convention)

She described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She trashed the Tea Party as “teahadists.” She called Bill Clinton “one of our greatest” presidents. She claimed that conservatives only criticized Lena Dunham’s comparison of voting to sex because they “fear female agency.”

She once wrote: “Like many GOP ideas about the poor, the panic about using food stamps for alcohol, pornography or guns seems to have been cut from whole cloth–or more likely, the ideas many have about the fantasy of poverty.” (A simple fact-check would show that food stamp fraud does occur and costs taxpayers tens of millions.)

Lacapria even accused the Bush administration of being “at least guilty of criminal negligience” in the September 11 attacks. (The future “fact-checker” offered no evidence to support her accusation.)

Her columns apparently failed to impress her readership, oftentimes failing to get more than 10-20 shares.

After blogging the Inquisitr, Lacapria joined Snopes, where she regularly plays defense for her fellow liberals.

She wrote a “fact check” article about Jimmy Carter’s unilateral ban of Iranian nationals from entering the country that looks more like an opinion column arguing against Donald Trump’s proposed Muslim ban.

Similarly, Lacapria — in another “fact check” article — argued Hillary Clinton hadn’t included Benghazi at all in her infamous “we didn’t lose a single person in Libya” gaffe. Lacapria claimed Clinton only meant to refer to the 2011 invasion of Libya (but not the 2012 Benghazi attack) but offered little fact-based evidence to support her claim.

After the Orlando terror attack, Lacapria claimed that just because Omar Mateen was a registered Democrat with an active voter registration status didn’t mean he was actually a Democrat. Her “fact check” argued that he might “have chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered.”

Lacapria even tried to contradict the former Facebook workers who admitted that Facebook regularly censors conservative news, dismissing the news as “rumors.”

In that “fact check” article, Lacapria argued that “Facebook Trending’s blacklisting of ‘junk topics’ was not only not a scandalous development, but to be expected following the social network’s crackdown on fake news sites.” The opinion-heavy article was mockingly titled: The Algorithm Is Gonna Get You.

Lacapria again played defense for Clinton in a fact check article when she claimed: “Outrage over an expensive Armani jacket worn by Hillary Clinton was peppered with inaccurate details.”

One of the “inaccurate details” cited by Lacapria was that, “The cost of men’s suits worn by fellow politicians didn’t appear in the article for contrast.” She also argued the speech Clinton gave while wearing the $12,495 jacket, which discussed “raising wages and reducing inequality,” wasn’t actually about income inequality.

Follow Peter Hasson on Twitter @PeterJHasson
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

Rocky

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #41 on: November 14, 2016, 09:08:01 AM »
Played this game of hillary Snopes an d kim lacapria with eef a month ago
https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=25159.0


I don't let emotion get involved when it comes to justice.

The accused plead guilty of a lesser crime so no he did not get off and there is no proof she knew him to be guilty. Don't believe everything you read in a meme. I think too many are failing to view republican hit pieces with the same skepticism that they view democrat hit pieces. I mean come on, I could post a meme saying that Hillary eats live puppies and someone would repeat it as truth.

This story is a convenient and easy hit piece on Clinton because to many people are either blinded by emotion or don't know enough about how the justice system works.

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/06/clintons-1975-rape-case/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/09/why-donald-trump-just-attacked-hillary-clinton-for-defending-an-accused-child-rapist-explained/


http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
#1 source for this  Snopes report....Clinton, Hillary Rodham.   Living History, ( by Hillary Rodham Clinton)

Author of Snopes report Kim LaCapria (She described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal.) is a New York-based content manager and longtime snopes.com message board participant. Although she was investigated and found to be "probably false" by snopes.com in early 2002, Kim later began writing for the site due to an executive order unilaterally passed by President Obama during a secret, late-night session (without the approval of Congress).  :shake:
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fact-checking-snopes-websites-political-fact-checker-is-just-a-failed-liberal-blogger/
You can always check Snopes BS for "mass shootings'' , it's just as biased and useless.
“I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made.”
                                                           Franklin D. Roosevelt

passivekinetic

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #42 on: December 21, 2016, 04:40:39 PM »
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

ren

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #43 on: December 21, 2016, 05:44:34 PM »
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fact-checker-arbitrate-fake-news-accused-defrauding-website-pay-prostitutes-staff-includes-escort-porn-star-Vice-Vixen-domme.html

The credibility of Snopes is now completely destroyed.

 :shaka:

Feel free to share on your Facebook to all your friends.

So weird!!!!!!! So these fact checkers are pot smoking hookers? WTF x inifinity




but...

I think people say that about snopes when they don't like the facts. I see it time and time again. Whenever a newsperson, a website, a TV show says something that they don't like or don't want to be true they claim bias. It is so much easier to claim bias than to have to face the fact that sometimes the facts don't agree with you.

The husband and wife team that own snopes have a pretty neutral record. The wife is Canadian not eligible to vote. The husband is an independent who was a registered republican.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2016, 10:42:45 AM by ren »
Deeds Not Words

whynow?

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #44 on: December 21, 2016, 08:11:23 PM »
LOL, facebook Zuckerberg fails again on believability.   Yippee ki yay MOTHERZUCKER! 
 

passivekinetic

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2016, 10:28:21 AM »
LOL I had a liberal friend comment that the article doesn't actually criticize Snopes' credibility and just talks about the people who work there.

You really can't force people to take the Red Pill when they refuse to.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

Inspector

SCIENCE THAT CAN’T BE QUESTIONED IS PROPAGANDA!!!

punaperson

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #47 on: December 22, 2016, 12:42:19 PM »
Another story here:

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/12/22/fact-check-snopes-fact-checker-arturo-garcia-is-an-anti-trump-blm-supporting-progressive/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
Well, just because that person is a biased prejudiced racist in his own personal life doesn't mean he can't set all that aside and be perfectly "objective" and without any assumptions or beliefs when he assumes his professional role as arbiter of "facts". Just ask our resident "objective" evaluator.

Inspector

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #48 on: December 22, 2016, 12:51:20 PM »
Well, just because that person is a biased prejudiced racist in his own personal life doesn't mean he can't set all that aside and be perfectly "objective" and without any assumptions or beliefs when he assumes his professional role as arbiter of "facts". Just ask our resident "objective" evaluator.
Yeah, but our "resident "objective" evaluator" is biased. Just look thru all the conversations I attempted to have with him.  :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
SCIENCE THAT CAN’T BE QUESTIONED IS PROPAGANDA!!!

whynow?

Re: The Liberal Bias of Snopes (topic updated)
« Reply #49 on: January 12, 2017, 09:23:27 PM »
Good video on MSM peddling fake news.   Especially CNN.  I remember the PH dispensary always playing CNN while you waited for your annual physical, talk about a captive audience.