First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Interesting

United States

#1 Oct 24, 2008
Who do we now believe? You can not trust the National Media and now it seems you can’t trust SNOPES? Does anyone have an alternative??


We learn the "truth" behind Snopes.com

For the past few years www.snopes.com has postioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell all final word' on any comment, claim and email. But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com . Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it - kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team - that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby.

David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago - and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research. After a few years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral, but over the past couple of years people started asking questions who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation? The reason for the questions - or skepticims - is a result of snopes.com claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong. Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues. I can personally vouch for that complaint.



A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the internet,'supposedly' the Mikkelson's claim to have researched this issue before posting their findings on snopes.com . In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever' took place.



I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me) thinking he would want to get to the bottomof this and I gave him Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers - and Bud was going to give him phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would have been willing to speak with him about it. He never called Bud. In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg no one from snopes.com ever contacted anyone with State Farm. Yet, snopes.com issued a statement as the 'final factual word' on the issue as if they did all their homework and got to the bottom of things - not!



Then it has been learned the Mikkelson's are jewish - very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson's liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee, what a shock?



So, I say this now to everyone who goes to www.snopes.com to get what they think to be the bottom line facts...'proceed with caution.' Take what it says at face value and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus, you can always google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems apparent that's all the Mikkelson's do. After all, I can personally vouch from my own experience for their 'not' fully looking into things.



For the past few years www.snopes.com has postioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell all final word' on any comment, claim and email.
But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com . Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it - kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team - that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby.
Interesting

United States

#2 Oct 24, 2008
David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago - and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research. After a few years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral, but over the past couple of years people started asking questions who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation? The reason for the questions - or skepticims - is a result of snopes.com claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong. Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues. I can personally vouch for that complaint.

A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the internet,'supposedly' the Mikkelson's claim to have researched this issue before posting their findings on snopes.com . In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever' took place.

personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me) thinking he would want to get to the bottomof this and I gave him Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers - and Bud was going to give him phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would have been willing to speak with him about it. He never called Bud. In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg no one from snopes.com ever contacted anyone with State Farm. Yet, snopes.com issued a statement as the 'final factual word' on the issue as if they did all their homework and got to the bottom of things - not!

Then it has been learned the Mikkelson's are jewish - very Democratic
(party) and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson's liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee, what a shock?

So, I say this now to everyone who goes to www.snopes.com to get what theythink to be the bottom line facts...'proceed with caution.' Take what it says at face value and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus,you can always google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems apparent that's all the Mikkelson's do. After all, I can personally vouch from my own experience for their 'not' fully looking into things.

Well then

Paris, TX

#3 Oct 24, 2008
bi-politcal

Dallas, TX

#4 Oct 24, 2008
Sounds like you should go to work for snopes.com Since you are a far-right extremist, you could probably balance them out.
That Budds not for Me

United States

#5 Oct 24, 2008
Frankly if this insurance agent is making over $250,000, it is no wonder the industry is in trouble and leaving customers in the lurch. I thank him for advertising as I was about to do business with him but googled first.
wrong

Dallas, TX

#6 Oct 24, 2008
Interesting wrote:
Who do we now believe? You can not trust the National Media and now it seems you can’t trust SNOPES? Does anyone have an alternative??
We learn the "truth" behind Snopes.com
For the past few years www.snopes.com has postioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell all final word' on any comment, claim and email. But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com . Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it - kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team - that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby.
According to snopes.com , the above report is FALSE!

“I pay tax so you dont have to.”

Since: Sep 08

Chicago, IL

#7 Oct 24, 2008
Snopes is a generally trusted site because they generally back their findings with news sources, government documents, or video. However, like any "news" source today, one should seek out alternatives to balance and possible errors and intentional skewing of information.

I think the most important thing going for snopes is that it genuinely appears unbiased. They've openly disproved many of the crazy rumors start about Gov. Palin. They also don't have a "true/untrue" only position, with items having an "undetermined" status.
OBAMA-ACORN FRAUD

Richmond, CA

#8 Oct 25, 2008
It's the exact freedom Barak Hussein Obama will try to crush if he, through ACORN, is allowed to rob this election.

As a tax payer and lover of freedom I support Gregg Bud! Keep spreading the message because obviously it works!
guyfroml

Lacombe, LA

#9 Oct 25, 2008
I see my comment about snopes.com is being discussed here. I simply want to tell everyone, particular "bi-political" in Dalls, my commentary was based off the facts from my own experience and what's stated about snopes.com on wikepedia. However, since the time my comment has been working its way around blogs, I have had numerous people contact me providing even more info about snopes.com . While such info has been interesting, I found it to be very personal in nature and took it with a grain of salt. I can understand nobody here personally knows me. But if you spoke with anyone who does, they will tell you I say what I think and do what I say. A "straight shooter" falls short of describing me. I will admit to being a conservative, even libertarian, but I speak truthfully and honestly - even if I allow my feelings to be shown on my sleeve. After all, liberals are allowed to do that, so why shouldn't I?
Abby

Kirkland, WA

#10 Oct 27, 2008
"Who do we now believe? You can not trust the National Media and now it seems you can’t trust SNOPES? Does anyone have an alternative??"

There is an alternative that makes sense: evaluate statements based on their substance, not on who made them. Consider the supporting evidence, seek relevant information, and challenge contradictions. Be skeptical. Keep an open mind and be aware of the influences our emotions have on our rational thoughts.
hmmm

Paris, TX

#11 Oct 27, 2008
Abby wrote:
"Who do we now believe? You can not trust the National Media and now it seems you can’t trust SNOPES? Does anyone have an alternative??"
There is an alternative that makes sense: evaluate statements based on their substance, not on who made them. Consider the supporting evidence, seek relevant information, and challenge contradictions. Be skeptical. Keep an open mind and be aware of the influences our emotions have on our rational thoughts.
Good point. I think it is called "critical thinking" and I wish they would teach it starting in kindergarten!! you obviously get it.

“I'll get you my pretty!”

Since: Jul 08

Over the Rainbow

#12 Oct 27, 2008
The Mikkelson's have NEVER hidden the fact that they started snopes.

I trust snopes on most cases because they have taken a bit of time to do some research. They have also printed updated and corrected stories when they did receive incomplete or incorrect information.

Look at their FAQs.
http://www.snopes.com/info/faq.asp

I still go to them to look to see if some of the crap that comes through my inbox is true or a cute/horrible work of someone's imagination.

“I'll get you my pretty!”

Since: Jul 08

Over the Rainbow

#13 Oct 27, 2008
guyfroml wrote:
I see my comment about snopes.com is being discussed here. I simply want to tell everyone, particular "bi-political" in Dalls, my commentary was based off the facts from my own experience and what's stated about snopes.com on wikepedia. However, since the time my comment has been working its way around blogs, I have had numerous people contact me providing even more info about snopes.com . While such info has been interesting, I found it to be very personal in nature and took it with a grain of salt. I can understand nobody here personally knows me. But if you spoke with anyone who does, they will tell you I say what I think and do what I say. A "straight shooter" falls short of describing me. I will admit to being a conservative, even libertarian, but I speak truthfully and honestly - even if I allow my feelings to be shown on my sleeve. After all, liberals are allowed to do that, so why shouldn't I?
Wikipedia is hardly a hard and fast research site as well.

I can not use it as a source in any of my research projects for school or work. I sometimes use it to help direct me to scholarly works, but as a stand alone source, well, it's not very valid.
Concerned in Saint Louis

Saint Louis, MO

#14 Oct 27, 2008
I'm firmly against uneducated people being able to vote... I'm not so sure you should be allowed to vote. Only morons are scared off by his middle name. Put down your guns and religion and jump into the 21st century - the information age!
OBAMA-ACORN FRAUD wrote:
It's the exact freedom Barak Hussein Obama will try to crush if he, through ACORN, is allowed to rob this election.
As a tax payer and lover of freedom I support Gregg Bud! Keep spreading the message because obviously it works!
Concerned in Saint Louis

Saint Louis, MO

#15 Oct 27, 2008
guyfroml wrote:
I see my comment about snopes.com is being discussed here. I simply want to tell everyone, particular "bi-political" in Dalls, my commentary was based off the facts from my own experience and what's stated about snopes.com on wikepedia. However, since the time my comment has been working its way around blogs, I have had numerous people contact me providing even more info about snopes.com . While such info has been interesting, I found it to be very personal in nature and took it with a grain of salt. I can understand nobody here personally knows me. But if you spoke with anyone who does, they will tell you I say what I think and do what I say. A "straight shooter" falls short of describing me. I will admit to being a conservative, even libertarian, but I speak truthfully and honestly - even if I allow my feelings to be shown on my sleeve. After all, liberals are allowed to do that, so why shouldn't I?
You know what they say - be skeptical of the man who tells you he's honest. What part of McCain's camp do you work for? Just curious.
Abby

Kirkland, WA

#16 Oct 27, 2008
Ignorance is not a crime...but perpetuation of ignorance is. A few relevant quotes for your enjoyment:

"We are all victims of mythology in one way or another. We are the inheritors, and many times the propogators, of a desire to believe what we want to believe, regardless of whether or not it is true." -J.V. Stewart

"Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -John F. Kennedy

"The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge." -Elbert Hubbard

"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies." -Friedrich Nietzsche
country gal

De Kalb, TX

#17 Oct 28, 2008
I trust snopes on pictures because I think that is something that can be examined and explored as fact or fiction. But when it comes down to Obama and what 'he is' or 'isn't', I do not trust them at all. Their is no PROOF to back up what is said. Whose to say they are not Obama supporters or that Obama used some of his illegal millions to buy them off. When it comes to something as important as Obama and his religion, friends, beliefs, etc., I want proof.
Social_Progressi ve

Redmond, WA

#18 Oct 28, 2008
Concerned in Saint Louis wrote:
I'm firmly against uneducated people being able to vote... I'm not so sure you should be allowed to vote. Only morons are scared off by his middle name. Put down your guns and religion and jump into the 21st century - the information age!
<quoted text>
At the time of the founding fathers, only property owners (i.e. the land-owning gentry) could vote. It wasn't until 1910 or later that women got the right to vote and not until the civil rights movement of the 1960's that blacks in the South really could vote. So the situation you describe is historically very new...

“I pay tax so you dont have to.”

Since: Sep 08

Chicago, IL

#19 Oct 28, 2008
Concerned in Saint Louis wrote:
I'm firmly against uneducated people being able to vote... I'm not so sure you should be allowed to vote. Only morons are scared off by his middle name. Put down your guns and religion and jump into the 21st century - the information age!
<quoted text>
What is your criteria for being educated?
Abby

Kirkland, WA

#20 Oct 28, 2008
country gal:

"Proof" is hard to come by, but Snopes does the best they can by revealing the sources of the information on which they base their judgement about what is true and what is false. Also, they are open to new information that is relevant.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Paris Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
New Tropical Sno owner ruins classic institution 35 min Bo Knows 13
Rainbow Christan Daycare 43 min slander mountain 16
Paris Ortho not taking care of vets 49 min Just the Facts 23
nl tax going up! 54 min second amendment 13
What branch of service should I join 1 hr onionslice 7
nl tax eval 1 hr Vote no 4
Interesting Penal Codes 1 hr Vote no 6
R I P Paris Lakes Medical Center 2 hr Take a Moment 62
Was God a Christian? 4 hr Married to the Mob 254
Married to the mob mental help removed 4 hr Married to the bo... 44
"Married to the Mob" 12 hr Married to the Mob 351
what happened to lawsuit against Matt Birch 14 hr Married to the Mob 43
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Paris Mortgages