Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: wiggen
And until the Daily Mail article it appears nobody else did either.

Incorrect. It has been known by any number of people that snopes was unreliable especially when it comes to political items.

You appear to be singling out this one reporter

I "singled out" this reporter because he is the one who wrote the article.

Should I have singled out his next door neighbor?

Sheesh!

And I am pointing out that this is something that anyone who did a small amount of digging knew years ago.

Using snopes as a fact check is like using Wikipedia for research. In both cases you are taking the word of people about which you know nothing.

As a starting place it is fine, but not as the source of all truth.

Like I said before he gets a small pat for suddenly noticing the work someone else did and deciding to fact check it.

He gets a kick for being naive for so long.

21 posted on 12/29/2016 8:20:11 PM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (Not a Romantic, not a hero worshiper and stop trying to tug my heartstrings. It tickles! (pink bow))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: Harmless Teddy Bear

how about singling out the 5000 other media outlets and 50000 other reporters?


24 posted on 12/29/2016 11:40:14 PM PST by wiggen (#JeSuisCharlie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

Actual reviews of Wikipedia shows it to be reliable. I often use it as a starting point.


25 posted on 12/30/2016 12:29:16 AM PST by carcraft (Pray for our Country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson