Someone asked me about the quality of Snopes.com in the comments of one of my posts so I thought I would cross-post my reply here as well in case anyone is interested. I have referenced fact checking from Snopes as well as posting links to Snopes articles, so this is a fair question.
Snopes is different from most other fact checking websites or organizations I use as a source because it is a privately owned website rather than being run by a news organization (AP, AFP, Reuters) or affiliated with a university or nonprofit organization (factcheck.org, Politifact).
Snopes started in the 1990s as a page to debunk urban legends on the internet and evolved into the multipurpose fact checking site that it is today. It is considered by journalists and other credible folks to be a reliable source and its integrity and neutrality has not come under serious question (other than by extremist individuals and organizations that disagree with the facts in general).
Snopes came under some scrutiny about 4 years ago when the two founders of the site, Barbara and David Mikkelson, underwent a divorce and the ownership of the site was contested between David and a company to whom Barbara sold her share of the site. However, this did not raise specific concerns about the quality or neutrality of the site, just the ownership and the potential for it to be shut down.
One article I read from Forbes (referenced below) tried to cast aspersions on Snopes because David Mikkelson wouldn't divulge specific information about his divorce to the author, but I investigated the author himself and he seems to have personal biases against fact checkers based on articles he's written, so there are some issues with that analysis.
I will say that Snopes has a less formal tone and appearance (and name, frankly) than most other fact checking organizations and because of that I will often make an effort to use them as a secondary or supporting source rather than rely on them entirely, but this isn't always possible. Because Snopes started as an internet page investigating online phenomena, they sometimes fact check stories and viral content that loftier fact checkers aren't as interested in, including many things circulating on Facebook.
Long story short, they are considered credible and non-partisan and I trust their reporting. If more information ever comes to light that suggests otherwise, I will of course cease to use them as a source for my posts, but they've been at it for over 25 years so hopefully that won't happen.
Sources
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48867870
https://www.npr.org/2017/07/26/539576135/fact-checking-website-snopes-is-fighting-to-stay-alive
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep comments respectful and factual. Abusive or disrespectful comments will be deleted.