TRUE OR FALSE? SNOPES began as a website to debunk urban myths, but since being bought by a major internet conglomerate, Snopes acts as final word on which conspiracy theories have merit and which are too disruptive of the dominant narrative. As the internet grew, Snopes gathered geek cred to join National Geographic Magazine and the History Channel as de facto authoritive brands trusted to provide nonpartisan accounts of current and past events, except of course all three simply confirm the authorized story. Another would-be gatekeeper, on who says what’s what, is Wikipedea. Because the online encyclopaedia is crowd-sourced, its authority is regularly questioned, and Wikipedia entries on controversial issues are demonstraby slanted by editorial teams advancing agendas that mirror the fully funded propaganda campaigns dominating conventional media. While Snopes was great at arresting rumors about vanishing hitchhikers or microwaved babies, more and more we see Snopes consulted about news scoops and whistleblower revelations, and it’s no surprise that Snopes summarily dismisses incidiary exposees that threaten established power. Don’t take my word for it, let’s ask Snopes!