Babylon Bee: Snopes Introduces New ‘Factually Inaccurate But Morally Right’ Fact Check Result – IOTW Report

Babylon Bee: Snopes Introduces New ‘Factually Inaccurate But Morally Right’ Fact Check Result

Babylon Bee: U.S.—Popular fact-checking site Snopes.com confirmed Wednesday they are debuting a new “Factually inaccurate but morally right” fact check result for claims they don’t want to debunk because they coincide with Snopes editors’ worldview.

The fact-checking website will now label inaccurate claims that they deem “morally right” with the new label, giving public figures whose hearts are in the right place a pass.

“We were often running into situations were a truth claim was absolutely absurd, but it supported progressive causes,” said one Snopes editor. “So sometimes we just called it a ‘Mixture,’ but then people might get the idea that our favorite politicians are being slightly dishonest sometimes.”  more here

13 Comments on Babylon Bee: Snopes Introduces New ‘Factually Inaccurate But Morally Right’ Fact Check Result

  1. I feel the need to share this Facebook conversation from today.

    C: So wait……you’re saying the racist a-hole is the victim here?? Nice spin.
    LCD: thank you for bringing Orwell to reality! (note: original post was an Orwell quote)
    K (who happens to be C’s wife): ..When the group behind “propaganda,” “surveillance” and the worst “cult of personality” we’ve ever seen in a Presidential administration tries to convince you otherwise…..
    K: Orwell would be outraged! What a joke! Did you even read the book? Do you know anything about it’s socialist author!!!!! Holy Moly….
    K: May (the) God (Orwell himself did not believe in) help us.
    LCD: You are off by one presidency and one missed presidency BTW
    LCD: I am trying to understand you guys’ end game here. You don’t appear to be trying to convince anyone of your point of view, unless ‘you’re a racist (or support a racist) if you disagree with me’ is an attempt to convince. You never provide factual support. So what are you hoping to accomplish? I sincerely mean this.
    C: Dan, your goal (imo) here on Facebook seems to always be to to elicit a ‘reaction’, or to start an argument. (I actually don’t believe you even believe half of the BS you spew) Once I realized this, I started ignoring anything and everything you posted on Facebook. I have been successful for about two years. However, when you post something so completely asinine as this, I cannot stay silent. By turning Orwell’s words on their head to use as the OPPOSITE argument, you are being EXACTLY like the oppressors in the novel. “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength” “A racist a**hole is a VICTIM because he is being called out for being a racist a**hole”. No Dan. The Covington kids are not victims. I don’t care how bad it gets for them. THEY were the racists. THEY were the intimidators. And yes, a MAGA hat says A LOT. You want “proof”? Look around you. It is America now.
    C: My “end game” is to never get sucked down the Left Coast Dan-pointless-argument-vortex.
    LCD: C wow! Do you do this with anyone else on Facebook?
    C: Call out people who completely mis-use a quote to further extreme right-wing media-spun talking points? Yes, every time.

    2
  2. I remember when the Left would cry “You can’t legislate morality!”, and “What gives you the right to put your version of morality on someone else?” in stringent chastisement of anyone that even mentioned anything as being morally right or wrong.

    I guess those days are now past, they seem to have no problem now with having become their own moral authority that everyone is expected to either embrace and follow or be forced to follow no matter their own beliefs.

    8
  3. Godless Leftist Logic:
    “I know what I’m saying is in fact not true, but I hate you while I love myself and this is what I think so I insist it is the truth. And I won’t let you show me I’m wrong…… But why won’t you get into a ‘discussion’ with me?!! “

    6
  4. I’ve just been to Snopes. I didn’t find the “new” rating anywhere. The second to last paragraph in the article together with the other articles in the sidebar convince me the article is satirical and not intended to be factual.

    Another example of Poe’s Law, I guess.

Comments are closed.