Unless you were a fellow Usenet hound, odds are pretty good I’ve known about Snopes considerably longer than you have. David Mikkelson, when he would post in the newsgroup alt.folklore.urban, used to sign his posts ” – snopes.” So, when he and his wife Barbara (also an alt.folklore.urban denizen) founded the most prominent urban folklore site on the web, that’s where the name came from.
(Well, in that instance. It originally came from Faulkner‘s brain.)
It was a great newsgroup to follow, and David and people who clearly tried to be like him were marvelous to read. They were rigorous in their analyses, with robust insight into likely origins, connections, and ongoing motivations of the stories that would circulate. For a good crash course in skepticism, and particularly rhetorical dissection, you could do much worse than following David around to see what he wrote.
It has been my consistent experience that even as the site has grown and a staff has become necessary, this analytical rigor has persisted. A Snopes.com page remains a highly effective tool for dissecting a story. If there is corroboration to report, it will be shown. Variations of the same story? Those will be there too—dutifully cited and documented. In short, if there’s a page on Snopes on a topic or anecdote, you can safely assume it deserves inclusion in the body of work you digest on said topic or anecdote.
Unfortunately, in some circles, it has become fashionable to denigrate Snopes.com. A frequent trope is that Snopes is run by “a liberal couple with a cat.” (I’m not sure why or how being a liberal, part of a couple, or a cat owner should disqualify you from reasoned analysis and commentary, but whatever.) Several weeks ago I referred to Snopes on Twitter and got a lot of dirty laundry about how the Mikkelsons are divorced now, and he married a hooker or something, and I don’t know what else. Again, not seeing the germaneness.
It’s never been more important to question what you read or hear, and I think a lot of us are doing that more often. But even when we pay lip service to having our guard up, we’re still letting confirmation bias determine way too much of our behavior. Don’t assume you know what “a liberal couple with a cat” is going to have to say about an issue, and definitely don’t discredit it on that basis. Open your eyes, open your brain, and read for yourself. Snopes.com remains a sharp and well-crafted tool in the chest of any responsible information consumer.
You might also like:
- This really happened!
No, Steak n Shake does not prohibit prayer in its restaurants. No, Febreze isn’t unbelievably toxic… - Obama dons combat boots, stomps baby bunny rabbits to death
Somebody forwarded me some “vital” information today that described, in some detail, how Barack Obam… - Off and running at Rocket City Mom
My first post at Rocket City Mom went up this morning! It’s a review of the U.S. Space & Rocket … - CNN.com and several thousand of its readers don’t get it
No, nothing about political bias here, or showing videos of enemy snipers shooting American soldiers… - The dishonest dictators of Ravelry.com
Want to hear a lovely story of guilt by association, followed by a conviction with no appeal? Saints…