7

13 comments

[–] jidlaph 1 points (+1|-0)

I think the biggest indicator that this story is false is that the MSM would be apoplectic about such a raid, but they haven't mentioned anything about it.

The Associated Press certainly didn't keep Obama's raid on them secret.

[–] Sarcastaway 3 points (+3|-0)

I didn't even read the article, and I should probably clarify that my statements are about Snopes, not this particular piece. Snopes loves to act like they have some sort of grasp on absolute truth that exceeds us mere mortals, and it comes across as hugely condescending.

I don't even disagree with Snopes most of the time, but journalists of all people should understand that the truth doesn't need gatekeepers. Even when those gatekeepers are good, the systems they put in place are always used to distort the truth if given enough time, which hurts the practice of journalism itself.

[–] RobertoAnderson 2 points (+2|-0)

The thing I dislike about Snopes the most is how fast they supposedly fact check "trending news" even in cases where it wouldn't be possible.

They either aren't doing their due diligence or are just rushing to get out some page somebody can link that essentially says the equivalent of

Is this news story true? We asked the people involved but they haven't said anything and it's been six hours so here's a bunch of non-related non-journalists saying this story isn't true.

They don't seem to realize that nobody that isn't a bit gullible believes they have completely, undeniably confirmed a story as false in under 24-48 hours.

[–] [Deleted] 1 points (+1|-0)

Aren't journalists supposed to be the gatekeepers?

[–] Sarcastaway 0 points (+0|-0)

Collectively, they sure seem to think their publications are gatekeepers. In reality its the various hedge funds and world governments that call their shots.

Any individual journalist should have the right to act as a gatekeeper if they want to, but it gets dangerous when they become part of larger groups that have billions of dollars tied up in politics.

For example, do you think a Washington Post journalist is going to play hardball on an issue like Amazon's monopolistic business practices? Supposedly they have, but if you actually read those articles they spend eight paragraphs blowing Bezos over his business genius for ever one they spend actually talking about antitrust law.