I respected Snopes because they'd use to constantly tell us to be wary of "authoritative" sources itself included... It sadden me to see all my lose all my heroes to the current madness and it fills me with a great degree of self doubt.
Is Snopes doing anything differently than always they have done? They've always debunked lies and wild stories with facts, and cited their sources.
If you're uncomfortable with Snopes' fact-checking, but can't show where they've erred (and not corrected it), maybe they're not the problem.
Just to clarify again since the article is wrong (and in a really really really bad way) on this: Iyad El-Baghdadi is not ISIS-affiliated, in any way. (He has a similar last name to ISIS leader, but that's it.) And he was the one encouraging Muslims to troll ISIS.
I’ve grown not trust the so-called fact checking sites. When you drill down on the ownership and alliances of many of these sites, you'll find them financed and supported by biased parties that have no interest in facts and are in effect, propaganda mills.
Then point out where they are factually incorrect.
Snopes has been problematic this cycle. There are tens of articles disputing the specific assertions they've made on a swath of different topics. I don't need to go into the details here. It doesn't help the argument.
No, get into the details. I've seen lots of people saying "Snopes? Clearly biased liars." but not backing it up with any facts. Show your work.