March 31, 2010 12:11 PM

Snopes, FactCheck, Wikipedia - liberal bias

I have addressed this issue before, but thanks to for this research and analysis:

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Snooping On Snopes

There has been much speculation about the validity of information provided by self-proclaimed "urban legend" debunkers Snopes and FactCheck. I decided to take a closer look.
David and Barbara Mikkelson are the owners of Snopes and essentially provide much of their own research from their home in California's lush San Fernando Valley. About 2 hours of searching Snopes' site on political issues reveals that, their articles reflect a disturbingly left tilt, while frequently distorting or eliminating contradictory information.

For example, Snopes has a puzzling article on "Obama's 50 Lies." The authors proceed to list 50 innocuous and rather obscure charges, none of which I have ever heard. They then set about debunking most of the benign non-issues. But, try to fact find something relevant such as Mr. Obama's broken promise of healthcare transparency and you will get, "Sorry, no matches were found."

Mr. Obama and those in his adminstration made several references to his desire to eliminate both employer insurance and private insurers. If true, these are serious agenda items with massive consequences. After numerous searches, Snopes repeatedly responded with "Sorry, no matches." Yet, here is a montage of the actual comments on youtube.

The Mikkelson's, it turns out, are big Obama supporters and in favor of much of his tranformational agenda.
Factcheck is a similar resource, but appears to have a more fact-based approach. It too is owned by a now liberal group, the Annenberg Foundation. Originally, founder Walter Annenberg was a conservative Reagan backing Republican. The family's views have changed dramatically over the years, which may or may not seep into the site's reporting. So, again I spent an interesting hour snooping around the site.

Read the entire article - which includes Wikipedia - at


Posted in Liberal Hypocrisy, Media Bias | Permalink


Thanks for the info about Snopes. Many people I know use it. I wonder if you are aware of a Christian site. It was started by a man who was a classmate of mine at Biola University in the 60s. The web address is:

Posted by: Alice Tucker | March 31, 2010 12:49 PM

Thanks Barbara, I have often thought there was an agenda behind snopes but never really able to put my finger on it. I foudn it odd when I was looking up the validity of Obama Illinois vote on sex ed in Kindergarten. Snopes said he wasn't for it but when you read the minutes he did vote for it. I will use from now on. Again, thank you!

Posted by: Monica | March 31, 2010 12:51 PM

Try It's run by Christians. It's not been updated in quite a while, but they are working on getting it up and running again. Soon, the hoaxes section ought to be up. Otherwise, the best thing to do is a Google search, looking for credible sources that actually link to or credit their own sources!

Posted by: Kristina Seleshanko | March 31, 2010 2:53 PM

Here is another example of the same thing from Wikipedia.

Posted by: Jennifer | March 31, 2010 4:20 PM

Thanks for the information! And thank you to Alice and Kristina for the alternative sites.

Posted by: silver | April 19, 2010 1:25 PM

Christian sites tend to have a conservative bias. So where can we get the truth? I believe by watching and reading a variety of sources instead of relying on a conservative or liberal spin we can get a clearer picture. Eliminate the entertainers such as Hannity (conservative) and Oberman (liberal).

Posted by: Ruthie | June 2, 2010 1:38 AM

In my opinion, is significantly more biased than and I consider to be biased for the left. See for yourself; just go to factcheck's web site and you'll see how the majority of their articles are damaging to Republicans. You will be hard pressed to find a negative article on the Democrats. Also,'s message boards are almost completely made up of liberals.

Posted by: Gene | November 4, 2010 2:44 PM

I was a member on the Snopes discussion forum. I found that much of their 'research' is in the form of group discussions. Whatever the group opinion is on a subject, becomes their judgement. I argued about this method. There were two instances where I was present and witness to the events, yet I was discredited as an eye witness because my first-person testimony ran contrary to the group opinion. I no longer visit their forum.

Posted by: galen | March 26, 2011 8:16 AM

Barbara, I clicked on the link for ClearGov for your article, but it's gone. Was it scrubbed or just old or changed? Please advise...

Mark H.

Posted by: Mark Hilbrink | July 18, 2012 1:24 PM

Hi Barbara, I know this is an older post. I found that snopes is very left leaning. Another surprising? one is Wikipedia. I went to look up Margaret Sanger. There was some quote of hers going around; basically saying 'blacks are stupid' but that is NOT a direct quote. Wikipedia says she had said certain things, but 'tried' to clear her name, saying 'she really meant this..' You can't change history, and I found that is what they try to do, in my own opinion.

Posted by: ShellyH | November 30, 2012 3:27 PM

Post a comment