Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Have independent studies evaluated Snopes’ accuracy and bias over time?
Executive summary
Independent, peer-reviewed and journalistic studies have evaluated Snopes’ accuracy and bias at various times: a data-driven comparison of fact-checkers (covering 2016–2022) found high agreement between Snopes and PolitiFact (only one substantive conflict) [1], and earlier manual reviews (FactCheck.org in 2009) found Snopes’ political items “utterly poker‑faced” [2]. Media-rating services and watchdogs (Ad Fontes, Media Bias/Fact Check, AllSides) give differing bias assessments—Ad Fontes rates Snopes neutral (reliable), MBFC calls it Left‑Center, and AllSides shows a fact‑check bias chart placing Snopes among other fact‑checkers [3] [4] [5].
1. What independent, data‑driven research says: high agreement with peers
A systematic, quantitative study scraped thousands of fact checks (2016–Aug 2022) and compared Snopes and PolitiFact; the authors report only one case of a conflicting verdict once minor rating differences were normalized, which the paper interprets as strong agreement between those two organizations over that period [1]. That study also documented operational differences—Snopes produced far fewer distinct authors [6] than PolitiFact [7] over the same interval—highlighting differences in scale and staffing that can affect process and consistency [1].
2. Historical manual checks: earlier positive appraisals from fact‑checking peers
FactCheck.org conducted a manual review of a sample of Snopes’ political items and found them to be “utterly poker‑faced,” noting Snopes receives more complaints of being too liberal but that the sampled political fact checks did not reveal partisan bias [2]. Wikipedia’s Snopes entry cites that 2009 FactCheck.org review and also references other favorable appraisals of Snopes’ cited sourcing and effort at even‑handed analysis [8].
3. Media‑bias ratings: evaluators disagree
Third‑party media evaluators diverge. Ad Fontes Media rated Snopes neutral on bias and “most reliable” for reliability [3]. Media Bias/Fact Check classifies Snopes as Left‑Center with high factual reporting and high credibility, noting story selection can slightly favor liberal perspectives [4]. AllSides includes Snopes in its fact‑check bias chart, placing it among other recognized fact‑checkers and signaling that bias perceptions vary by method and audience [5]. These differences reflect divergent methodologies: some rank bias by article content and tone, others by sampling or structural metrics [3] [4] [5].
4. journalistic and trade commentary: credibility, scale, and internal controversies
Journalistic accounts and industry observers have emphasized Snopes’ longstanding role and occasional controversies that factor into perceptions of bias and reliability. The American Press Institute highlighted Snopes as the name many cite when asked about fact‑checkers while also noting political audiences vary in trust—Republicans tend to distrust fact‑checking more than Democrats—which colors how bias accusations develop [9]. Forbes and other pieces have probed Snopes’ internal challenges and transparency, arguing that human fallibility and organizational disputes can influence trust even if editorial outcomes often align with peers [10].
5. Limitations and gaps in available evaluations
Available sources do not provide a single comprehensive, longitudinal audit of Snopes’ accuracy spanning its full history from 1994 to present; rather, we have snapshots: a large cross‑checker data study (2016–2022), early manual checks [11], and periodic ratings or commentary from media‑rating organizations and trade outlets [1] [2] [3] [4]. There is no source here that quantifies a precise accuracy percentage for Snopes across decades, nor one that uniformly applies the same rubric over time (available sources do not mention a full‑period longitudinal accuracy score).
6. How to interpret competing findings and what they imply
When data‑driven analysis (high agreement with PolitiFact) aligns with manual peer review (FactCheck.org’s favorable sample), that strengthens the claim that Snopes is broadly accurate in its verdicts for the periods studied [1] [2]. At the same time, differing bias ratings from Ad Fontes, MBFC and AllSides show that assessments of “bias” depend on methodology and audience expectations; perceived bias can stem from topic selection, political polarization in audiences, and organizational history—not solely from consistent factual error [3] [4] [5] [9].
7. Practical takeaway for readers and researchers
Independent evaluations available in this set show Snopes frequently aligns with other respected fact‑checkers and has earned generally positive reliability assessments, but bias ratings vary and trust is polarized along partisan lines [1] [3] [4] [9]. For rigorous use, cross‑check contentious claims with multiple fact‑checkers and consult the underlying primary sources Snopes cites; note that studies cover specific periods and methods, so conclusions about “bias over time” require combining multiple evaluations and acknowledging methodological differences [1] [2].
Sources cited above are drawn from the provided material: Harvard‑led data study (HKS Misinformation Review) [1]; FactCheck.org [2]; Ad Fontes Media [3]; Media Bias/Fact Check [4]; AllSides [5]; American Press Institute commentary [9].