I'm Upset: The Snopes is way too encyclopedic in its coverage now.
I remember when I basically read through the whole damn Snopes site and it mainly featured the classic urban legends and famous lore. Sure, its social service function could be greater at the moment than it was over a decade ago, but it was so much more satisfying to read debunks of things that everyone "knew" for decades being debunked than two day old social media trifles that will be forgotten in two days. It was always interesting to learn how the misunderstandings accrue, how they spread and how they are maintained than read about some boomer propaganda factory products.
Idk, maybe I should just pick up a book of folkloric tall tales from a library.
devtesla wrote
The constant short term social media shit has ruined Snopes and I don't think it really has utility value, since the social media companies are basically offloading a job onto them that they should be doing. Snopes itself often isn't really helping, as they often use curiosity gap headlines where you have to click through to see if something is not true, and sometimes spreading even a debunking can be harmful as it primes people. Often times social media rumors will involve pictures of people who aren't involved and Snopes will make their problems worse. Just a big mess