Snopes Offers Apology - Refeshing
 

We all make mistakes or have employees that do, it is refreshing to see a media outlet own their problem and take action as well as apologizing.

Snopes: Apology From Senior Management/

This is great to see.

I first used these folks in about 2015, so I missed the errors.

I have always found them to be thorough and complete.

It shouldn't be "refreshing." It should be typical, expected, no less than professional behavior. I'm sad that this is refreshing because it means most other places don't offer transparency, and admit when they make a mistake.

To me, Snopes is a reliable fact-checking resource, and always has been.

Note that in this apology, there is no mention that anything plagiarized was untrue. Facts are still facts, no matter where they came from, and whether or not you credited its source correctly or not.

If I say Thomas Edison invented the first electric refrigerator, I would be wrong. The credit for that invention goes to Fred W. Wolf.

However, the fact that the electric refrigerator was invented, can't be disputed. It's still fact, regardless of who invented it.

I completely agree with everything you said, and that is WHY I included the "refreshing" comment. I personally consider any source that has NEVER put out a retraction or correction to be lacking in credibility.

Woops, sorry I was unclear. I'm not sad that you think it's refreshing. I'm sad that it really IS refreshing. And yes it is refreshing. Which is sad.

I am sorry, I was more unclear than you were unclear - LOL. I understood your meaning. And agree, it is sad that it is refreshing. It should be ho-hum normal.

Please allow me to add to both comments.

We have become a nation who, at this time, simply accepts falsehoods. We don’t condemn it, and from my point of view, that is “enabling behavior”. It is destroying any true discourse, among other things.

Yes, it is sad, very sad. Lying is never ever something that should be accepted. And the lying being done today is on important issues.

And to add, adding links on here that you know are untrue, is a lie in itself.

Thank you. It is "refreshing" to know I was wrong since I thought it was George Westinghouse

On the other hand, "Google" tells me:

"Who is the inventor of the modern refrigerator?
The American inventors Oliver Evans, Jacob Perkins, and John Gorrie are credited with developing the earliest versions of the modern refrigerator in the early 1800s. Later that century, the work of German engineer Carl von Linden allowed chemical refrigerant to be stored efficiently, paving the way for mass production of refrigerators."

So I guess we're 0 for 2:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

The ELECTRIC refrigerator (and I should've specified - for home use).

The first electric refrigerator for home use was invented by Fred Wolf. It was called the Domelre, a portmanteau of DOMestic ELectric REfrigerator.

It was a commercial failure but did result in an innovation that hadn't been used in competitor models - the ice tray.

The History of the Refrigerator: Staying Cool Throughout the Ages

DOMELRE First Electric Refrigerator | ashrae.org

The history of the refrigerator — Sandvik Materials Technology

Wolf invented an electrical device that sat on top of your ice box and essentially replaced the block of ice. According to Wikipedia.

Yup, which resulted in a Refrigerator instead of an icebox. Kind of like an engine attached to a buggy changes it into a horseless carriage or automobile.

That is nice to see. I had some problems with Snopes' message board years back and have never been overly fond of them as a resource.

But lying by trusted snopes is refreshing because they admitted it after they got caught. Such hypocrisy. Sheep following the pied piper.

How did they lie? The article is very clear, one of the people was using quotes without giving the proper attribution. As soon as it was pointed out to others, it was immediately addressed and they apologized for the other persons actions.

Would you please provide support or a link demonstrating a case where they lied?.

When you say something is yours and it isn’t that’s lying. Bye!
—————————
Snopes launched a probe looking into the plagiarism allegations after BuzzFeed News sent inquiries to the fact-checker. Their investigation concluded Mikkelson plagiarized in a whopping 54 articles under his own name, a pseudonym "Jeff Zarronandia," and the generic Snopes staff in the byline.
—————
What is Plagiarism? - Plagiarism.org
What is Plagiarism? - Plagiarism.org
In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward

The individual - who is also the co-founder of Snopes, put his pseudonym on some of the source information and claimed to have been the author. So that individual - who is also the co-founder of Snopes, lied.

But Snopes didn't lie. In fact when the other officers of Snopes realized what was going on they did an internal investigation, and suspended their own co-founder from publishing anything on the platform, and issued the apology to the public.

They didn't say it was theirs, he used it without attribution - that is called plagiarism. When THEY found out that HE had plagiarized someone else's work, THEY immediately initiated an investigation, suspended HIM from editorial work, and apologized publicly to US and privately to the authors whose work had been used. This apparently happened a few times over the years compared to many thousands of articles.

So, is it your opinion that the entire organization should be condemned for the actions of one?

The plagiarism was pointed out to Snopes by Buzzfeed. Only then did they perform a investigation. What’s so refreshing about that. I like Tucker usually but don’t buy his antivax crap and don’t rationalize it.

Generally I think Snopes is a reliable fact checker and use them sometimes. But they have a political bias that makes their political fact checks suspect. No I don’t think the entire organization should be condemned but neither do I find it refreshing when the lie occurred right under their nose. FOX has fessed up too, most notable their cash cow Bill O’Riley got his walking papers.

Guilt by association?

"But lying by trusted snopes is refreshing because they admitted it after they got caught."

THEY did not lie, THEY did not get caught, THEY did not plagiarize. They caught the plagiarizer and THEY took action against him. Yet, it appears you are proposing that Snopes lied, I would very much like to see any evidence you have to support that.

I follow several fact checking sources and have found snopes a reliable source in this time when lying seems to be the norm.

Snopes is a left of center fact checking site that has received donations from Facebook and others: Snopes - Media Bias/Fact Check
FYI: The least biased fact checking site is TruthOrFiction.com, TruthOrFiction.com - Media Bias/Fact Check

Ok, so Snopes comes out with their mea culpa after their hand was caught in the cookie jar. They did not discover the gross plagarism, it was found by outsiders and brought to their attention. The editors at Snopes should have, at the very least, been running periodic checks with plagarism checking software. It is one thing to vigorously "fact check" your own work, and quite another to fall on your sword after you have been caught. And why did their co-founder find it necessary to write under a pseudonym?

Snopes describes themselves as a 'fact check.' nothing could be further from the truth-i found this out years ago. it's hardly a reliable source :shocked:

That great philosopher Andy Rooney once said “people will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe.” I like that but then I liked Andy Rooney. Lots of opinions but few real facts that people want to believe.

Snopes isn't the definitive arbiter of truth. I've seen them be biased many times. They lean left. Check all sides dot com for biases.

I too use a number of legitimate fact-checking sources and the fact that Snopes, unlike a lot of people and wacko conspiracy spreading media sources, is willing to admit when they were wrong - is nothing but a positive. The really ironic & hypocritical part, is in the fact that a lot of the critics of Snopes (and other legitimate fact-checking sources), will totally believe/buy the most outrageous nutcase conspiracies from sources like q-anon, Fox News, Newsmax, OAN, Etc, - in their entirety. If only there were an effective vaccine, against being so gullible and believing lies, without doing further serious research. lol

Exactly. They are anything but reliable or objective. They simply got caught this time and couldn't talk their way out of it

That’s nice to see. It is so common in journalism. Read half a dozen news stories about the same event in secondary-level newspapers and the story on which they base their stories and you will usually find several at least that use phrases or sentences without quotation marks or citing sources. This happens in movie reviews, too—if not with exact words, then with opinions.

I did a lot of scholarly writing in my academic career, and I was always scrupulous with sources. But now I use Ancestry a lot, and I often add photos of paintings of people found online without giving credit. If I include an article from Wikipedia or Geni on some ancestor’s page, I usually give credit by pasting in the link, but sometimes I forget.

I knew a novelist, the late John Gardner, who had a photographic memory and could quote an entire page of some book he read once at will. He got into big trouble in his biography of Chaucer for plagiarizing sentences here and there. However, I believe he had read those sources. They entered his mind, and he didn’t realize he was using what someone else wrote.

Then there is Martin Luther King, who, when he was in divinity school, didn’t feel he had time to research and write his own papers for class, so he went to the library archives, found papers written by other students decades before, and turned some in as his own work. I guess that’s how some people get to be a Reverend Doctor.

Have you ever forwarded some meme on Facebook? Do you know who created the meme? Do you know who took the photo behind that meme that had nothing at all to do with the meme? If you shared it, that’s double plagiarism.

It’s important to give attribution where attribution is due.

Be careful using Wikipedia. They publish just about anything that someone wishes to upload to them.

Snopes got caught by an outsider then cleaned up their act. Not much choice and not admirable. Same as when FOX fired Bill O’Reiley and their past network President. Did you think that was refreshing? FYI I stopped watching Tucker when he went on a vax skepticism rant. I don’t believe any source is above scrutiny.

I almost never forward Memes on FB unless the attribution is embedded. I was a wedding photographer for a few years and take copyright very seriously, it was the basis of my livelihood.

Yes, actually, anytime anyone admits they or an employee was wrong, I admire that, whether it is Fox, OAN, NewsMax or Scopes.

I can assure you a LOT of people are checking Scopes constantly, hoping and praying to find something they can point to as wrong. It seldom happens.

Not exactly. They publish EVERYTHING that ANYONE places on the page. But, then anyone else can fact check it and edit it to correct it. Many people don't like being corrected.

THE Wiki has been analyzed numerous times and found to be one of the most accurate sources published, either in print or online. Mainly because so many people can edit it. It keeps it honest. For a long time sources like encyclopedia Britannica tried to discredit Wiki, since it was costing them business. In the end they gave up, because they were simply proving Wiki is more accurate than they are.

Wiki can and does get updated many times a day, as fact come in and information is corrected. NO print media can do that.

More from Scopes, this if from the Writers:

snopes-writers-condemn-plagiarism/

Facts are sometimes hard to discover, for example, Washington never chopped down a cherry tree, nor did he say, "I cannot tell a lie," and yet, it's taught as a fact that he did.
I also believe they are teaching that Marconi invented the radio, but he stole 17 of Nikola Tesla's patents and in 1947 the US Supreme Court awarded the the invention of the radio to Nikola Tesla.

Agree, truth can be elusive.

I saw some research the other day that showed how people that have accepted one conspiracy lie are then much more likely to believe another, no matter how nonsensical. It is a sad spiral that many exploit.

I believe that O’Reiley left, it was because of a multitude (5 0r 6) accusations of sexual misconduct and not anything to do with news.

Carlson was a perfect substitute as he is the subject of a number of lawsuits (past and present), but they are for spreading misinformation and to my knowledge, not sexual misconduct.

In my humble and stupid opinion, the only way to insure that you know the true facts is checking multiple sources and never allow yourself to become captive of any one network, or better yet, simply forget the networks and read, not online

Thank you, I didn't see any point in pointing that out and just starting another argument, but I am glad you did.

I think I can count on 1 finger the number of times I recall FOX or OAN putting out a retraction.

Two people can look as the same sunrise and have two different OPINIONS. In you’re case you’re’ claiming the sun didn’t rise. When if fact it did.