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.
WE KNOW SNOPS IS A LEFTWING HACKER
Executive summary
Claims that “Snopes is a leftwing hacker” are not supported by the sourced record: multiple fact‑checking outlets and profiles describe Snopes as a long‑running fact‑checking site that has been evaluated as nonpartisan in samples (FactCheck.org found Snopes’s political rumor checks free from bias in its 2009 review) and its founder has said he has never run for office or donated to parties [1] [2]. At the same time, Snopes has faced credibility challenges — a 2021 admission of plagiarism by founder David Mikkelson and persistent accusations of liberal bias in public discourse — which are documented and have shaped perceptions [3] [4].
1. What people mean when they say “Snopes is leftwing”
Accusations of liberal bias against Snopes have circulated online for years; they typically point to Snopes’ political articles and the fact that many “Hot 50” items involve politics [5] [4]. Reporting shows these accusations arose alongside Snopes’ growth from an urban‑legend site into a major political fact‑checker, and some critics treat perceived editorial choices or the presence of staff with political pasts as signs of bias [6] [4].
2. Independent evaluations find limited evidence of systematic partisan skew
FactCheck.org’s 2009 review sampled Snopes’ handling of rumors about George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Barack Obama and “found them to be free from bias in all cases,” and multiple retrospectives note FactCheck.org’s probe of chain‑mail claims that Snopes was “very Democratic” [1] [7]. PolitiFact and other observers likewise have treated Snopes as a mainstream fact‑checking player rather than as an explicit partisan outlet [8].
3. Credibility issues that feed the perception of partisanship
Snopes’ reputation has been dented by a documented plagiarism scandal: the Associated Press reported that founder David Mikkelson admitted to lifting phrases and passages from other news stories over several years, and staff condemned the practice [3]. Such ethical lapses give critics ammunition to question Snopes’ reliability and may reinforce suspicions that the site has an agenda [3] [4].
4. Structural and historical context that matters
Snopes began in 1994 as an urban‑legends site and expanded into politics as social media amplified viral claims; that evolution inevitably put it in the middle of political fights and conspiracy narratives, which fuels claims of bias from many quarters [4] [1]. Its founder has stated he has never run for office or made political donations, and FactCheck.org reported the site was run by someone “who has no political party affiliation” [2] [5].
5. Why accusations can become more about narrative than evidence
Longstanding distrust of fact‑checkers — and the political uses of the “biased fact‑checker” narrative — mean that even measured findings or corrections can be framed as partisan attacks. Coverage notes that as Snopes expanded into politics, “the underbelly of the internet” produced conspiracies claiming Snopes is a liberal front, regardless of empirical evaluations [4] [7].
6. The mixed picture: reliability plus flaws
Taken together, the sources present a mixed but documentable picture: Snopes has been recognized as a prominent fact‑checking resource and found nonpartisan in specific reviews, yet it has significant documented faults (the 2021 plagiarism admission) and faces persistent public accusations of liberal bias [1] [3] [4]. That combination explains why some call it trustworthy while others call it partisan.
7. What the available reporting does not say
Available sources do not mention any credible evidence that Snopes operates as a politically motivated “hacker” or that it engages in covert political hacking operations; reporting instead focuses on editorial practice, accuracy, perceived bias, and ethical lapses (not found in current reporting). There is also no sourced finding in this set that Snopes systematically fabricates fact‑checks to serve a partisan agenda [1] [2] [8] [3].
8. How to evaluate Snopes’ claims yourself
Journalistic practice and the site’s own FAQ encourage looking at the sources Snopes cites and comparing them with primary documents; independent reviews (FactCheck.org, PolitiFact reporting) provide additional checks on methodology and fairness [9] [8] [2]. Be alert to documented shortcomings (plagiarism history) but weigh specific fact‑checks on their sourcing and transparency rather than accepting broad characterizations [3] [9].
Bottom line: the sourced record does not substantiate the sweeping assertion “Snopes is a leftwing hacker.” The best‑documented conclusions are: independent reviews have found instances of even‑handedness [1] [2], Snopes has faced credible ethical criticism [3], and public perception of bias remains contested and politically charged [4].