Unreal: Snopes Founder Marries Ex-Porn Star, Escort & Hires Her As Fact-Ccecking Site Admin!

People often confuse Truth with Facts.

Truth is an accepted version of events, as someone (one or many) believes it to have happened. Truth is easily manipulated.

A LIE is a deliberate mistelling of the Truth as everyone believes it to be. It is often quite easy to turn a Lie into the Truth if it's told often enough, and it's easy to manipulate people to believe the inaccurate version of events to be True.

FACTS are the actual events that happened, which is usually quite different from the Truth, and always different from a lie.

Most people ignore facts, and accept either the Truth or the Lie that they have been told, and refuse to believe they've been duped.

When Donald Trump says he "always tells the Truth", that's because it's the version of events that HE accepts, whether or not they match the FACTS.

TRUTH and FACTS are NOT the same thing.

The space between FACTS and TRUTH is where Conspiracy Theories begin.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
www.naturalnews.com...

Funny how you quote a site that pushes only fake news....

So what, who cares what her former profession was? What should matter is if she is bent on using agenda to fact check or not. Of course, sites hiring fact checkers should look for non bias fact checking employees.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

So you say Snopes is bias but you quote an article from the Daily Mail?

You do know that the Mail is a steaming pile of sensationalist horse crap and is considered something of a joke for its constant doom headlines over here in the UK?

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: SoulSurfer

So you say Snopes is bias but you quote an article from the Daily Mail?

You do know that the Mail is a steaming pile of sensationalist horse crap and is considered something of a joke for its constant doom headlines over here in the UK?

...the details can be easily checked out. The court records filed in the divorce proceedings are available and the 'other' woman in question is well known, having run for public office during which time she was open about her past. Really, there is nothing wrong with her past - her life, her choice. She did not break any laws. However, there is more to this story in the way that the Snopes founder behaved and also the political history of this other woman. The alleged deceit and political leanings do not sit well with a self proclaimed honest and unbiased source.

One only needs to look at a history of their true/false assessments to know that they are biased and untrustworthy when it comes to assessing the validity of any story. As for the Daily Mail, they are not claiming to be the arbiter of truth (as Snopes position themselves).

originally posted by: UKTruth


...the details can be easily checked out. The court records filed in the divorce proceedings are available and the 'other' woman in question is well known, having run for public office during which time she was open about her past. Really, there is nothing wrong with her past - her life, her choice. She did not break any laws. However, there is more to this story in the way that the Snopes founder behaved and also the political history of this other woman. The alleged deceit and political leanings do not sit well with a self proclaimed honest and unbiased source.

One only needs to look at a history of their true/false assessments to know that they are biased and untrustworthy when it comes to assessing the validity of any story. As for the Daily Mail, they are not claiming to be the arbiter of truth (as Snopes position themselves).

Exactly, though I have no problem with snopes being a voice just like the thousands of bloggers out there. But I do have a problem with them claiming to be the voice or authority of truth when they are not. They are simply one voice, no different than the daily mail.

If snopes can claim to be the authority of truth, then it should also fair game for the daily mail, and many other independent media out there. Why? because that is called true democracy.

The internet is like walking into a mall filled with many people with different backgrounds. Each one of those people has a voice, an opinion that may or may not differ from those around them. However, when one voice tries to Hijack the rest of the voices and claim to be the ONE voice; then we have a problem, because in it's own way that one voice (out of billions) has technically declared war on the other voices who may have a say in the matter (which usually opens doors for debates.)(Debating is also part of true democracy.)

But Mainstream media, Facebook, google (who promote snopes as the number 1 tool) is leaving no room for debates. And many voices are being silenced because of it. This is called tyranny, dictatorship and it is also a form of monopoly. This is the most UN-democratic position anyone can take.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

Agree. Trump has his work cut out for him to reverse the tyrannical control the left has on the media. I would hope that he would clear the path for multiple law suits against facebook, google et al to the extent that they allow equal access or go out of business through fines and law suits.