It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Snopes v Daily Caller

page: 1
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:50 AM
link   
Daily Caller (conservative news site) ran an article on John Kerry's daughter's program getting $ from State Department.
dailycaller.com...

Snopes called the article false
www.snopes.com...


now DC is calling out Snopes for falsehoods
dailycaller.com...


“However, the inference that Chairman Kerry was personally involved in the appropriation of said funds is fallacious,” Emery wrote. But TheDCNF never made that claim.

Emery described how the State Department’s Office of the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator (OGAC) provided funds to the Peace Corps, then omitted crucial facts that highlight Kerry’s relationship to the money.

Read more: dailycaller.com...]


looks like Snopes got busted on this one. wonder how many other of their stories needs to be looked at?
edit on 10-12-2016 by ElGoobero because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Snopes made there bias clear a long time ago. Nothing but a political hack group, on par with MSNBC. The fact that people consider both of them for news sources is concerning.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero

It's actually pretty easy to debunk snopes.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: WUNK22
Snopes made there bias clear a long time ago. Nothing but a political hack group, on par with MSNBC. The fact that people consider both of them for news sources is concerning.


Snopes is actually quite useful to confirm marginal stories, typically the quicker they try to "debunk" something, the more likely it is to be true. For example when reports surfaced last week of Wisconsin voting machines with broken security seals I didn't think much of it until an hour later when Snopes posted an elaborate debunking; at which point I naturally assumed they were in fact tampered with by Democrats.
edit on 10-12-2016 by Voiceofthemajority because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero

Snopes is correct in this case. The Daily Caller makes assumptions, most based on a meeting memo that doesn't contain the wording it claims.

Snopes shows this to be unproven and clearly shows why,.

How did it 'get busted' ?

I find the Daly Caller to be tabloidy, it's set up like Buzfeed. I didn't know it was particularly conservative.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 07:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: ElGoobero

Snopes is correct in this case. The Daily Caller makes assumptions, most based on a meeting memo that doesn't contain the wording it claims.

Snopes shows this to be unproven and clearly shows why,.

How did it 'get busted' ?

I find the Daly Caller to be tabloidy, it's set up like Buzfeed. I didn't know it was particularly conservative.



I have to hand it to you, you tow the party line through thick and thin ...and so quick to jump on these threads, just like snopes!



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

I logged on and it was the first thing I saw. This thread is not about me, though seems you want to make it about me.

I read through the 7 pages the DC article relies on. I found the article was REALLY REACHING.

edit on 10-12-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-12-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 08:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

I read through the 7 pages the DC article relies on. I found the article was REALLY REACHING.
So you disagree with Snopes, which does not find it reaching but rather they find it FALSE.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero

A couple of thoughts:

Snopes is debunking site, not a fact checking site. That in itself is okay, but it does mean that fact checking is a means to an end, and not the goal itself- They WANT to debunk, and that sometimes shines through.

Snopes are a great place to get some info, but ALWAYS check their sources, because they have a tendency to cherry pick data. Their sources might indeed say what Snopes claim they say (in fact, they usually do), but they might also say something more, that does not fit the narrative that Snopes presents.

Also, be sure to look into 'pro side' of the story because there is no guarantee that the 'con side' that Snopes site are neutral (to the facts).

Also also .. be extra critical when Snopes, when possible, have not reached out for a comment. That is just a big red flag. (But that goes for everyone, not just them)


edit on 10-12-2016 by DupontDeux because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero

Snopes isn't perfect by any means but they do try to get to the bottom of an issue. Meanwhile, the DC, like any conservative outlet, doesn't rely on facts, mostly lies that validate their feelings, views, and agendas. Conservatives have always hated Snopes because conservatives hate facts and reality.
edit on 10-12-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Swills

That's funny, I was going to say the same thing about every liberal media outlet out there... minus the whole trying to get to the bottom of an issue part.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: ElGoobero

Snopes is correct in this case. The Daily Caller makes assumptions, most based on a meeting memo that doesn't contain the wording it claims.



Is it cool to know everything???
I'm not a liberal so don't know the answer...

-Chris



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Voyaging

Of course you were, that doesn't surprise anyone. Conservatives are allergic to facts and all the proof you need is to look at who they elect president.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Swills

LOL at you assuming I'm a conservative, or ascribe to any particular political philosophy at all. I'm just pointing out the pot calling the kettle black. But I'm sure you'll come up with some snarky response filled with assumptions to detract from my point...



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero

When you look at the Daily Caller website, what do you see?

I ask because I'm sitting here across the Atlantic, devoid of your partisan politics over in the USA, looking at a pro-Trump right wing news site.

Do you think, by any chance, that that site is ever going to give you anything other than pro-Trump, right wing, viewpoints?

Because it isn't.

So when you berate Snopes, and say that the Daily Caller article is factual, have you actually researched the subject, or are you just parroting the thing that supports your paradigm?



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: fractal5

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Voiceofthemajority

I read through the 7 pages the DC article relies on. I found the article was REALLY REACHING.
So you disagree with Snopes, which does not find it reaching but rather they find it FALSE.


Snopes said unproven. That what the DC states is not proven.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: ElGoobero

Snopes is correct in this case. The Daily Caller makes assumptions, most based on a meeting memo that doesn't contain the wording it claims.



Is it cool to know everything???
I'm not a liberal so don't know the answer...

-Chris


Why the personal deflective posts ? I seem to see that more and more.

I read the article, then I read 7 pages of meeting minutes it is based on to form an opinion. It is not 'knowing everything' it is the opposite. If I knew everything, I would not have read all of that, I would have had the answer already.



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   
EXPOSED – Guess Who is REALLY Behind Snopes.com?


Chief among the Progressive stalwarts at Snopes is “main political fact-checker,” Kim Lacapria, according to the Daily Caller. Ironically, or not, prior to her position as political fact-checker for Snopes, Lacapria was wrote for the Inquisitr, a blog with less than stellar reputation.

Today, Snopes has turned into a sycophantic political surrogate for the Progressive Left, the Obama Administration, and Hillary Clinton. Fancying itself as a “political fact-checker,” it has become completely unreliable, existing as an excuse making machine for the morally relativistic and a propaganda apparatus fueled by unfounded accusations and political talking points; talking points seemingly crafted and issued directly from the Progressive minions of Chicago.




edit on Dec-10-2016 by xuenchen because: snoped



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: ElGoobero

It's actually pretty easy to debunk snopes.


But so many consider them the last word in recognizing truth, good position to be in. Power there and money to be made.




top topics



 
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join