“The Snopes.com web site is wholly owned and operated by Snopes Media Group Inc. (SMG), a California-based S Corporation. SMG is overseen by a board of directors comprising David Mikkelson, Brad Westbrook, and Chris Richmond.”

This information is displayed at https://www.snopes.com/disclosures/

Snopes lists its ownership information as well as its funding and allocation of its budget clearly online. Under its About Us page, it notes that it was founded nearly 30 years ago, and that it is an independent site. Its site explains: 

"Snopes got its start in 1994, investigating urban legends, hoaxes, and folklore. Founder David Mikkelson, later joined by his wife, was publishing online before most people were connected to the internet. As demand for reliable fact checks grew, so did Snopes. Now it’s the oldest and largest fact-checking site online, widely regarded by journalists, folklorists, and readers as an invaluable research companion.

Snopes.com is an independent publication owned by Snopes Media Group. Explore our FAQ to learn more about us, or consider becoming a Snopes member. If you have any questions, please let us know."

I looked through its FAQs and found further evidence, which is attached as a screen shot, of how it explains its independence and nonpartisanship. 

1) Snopes.com was started by Southern California resident David Mikkelson in the mid-1990s as a outlet for verifying, discussing and analyzing urban legends. Over time the site evolved to encompass other types of related material (e.g., hoaxes, scams, political rumors and misinformation) on the road to becoming a full-fledged fact checking organization.

2) Snopes currently comprises 16 employees, whose roles are listed here: https://www.snopes.com/team/

3) Snopes carries out fact checking, general news reporting, and tracking of position and policy statements by candidates through its OnTheIssues.org website.

4) The goals of Snopes over the coming year are to expand the quantity, scope, and reach of its fact-checking efforts and to launch and improved version of its OnTheIssues political position-tracking website.

I spent a day in March 2022 with a brief follow up in May 2022 reviewing the Snopes site. As mentioned in the above criteria, it was founded in the mid1990s and its aims at the founding and now are clearly stated. Other parts of its site, including its funding, its methods, its selection, its staff, and its nonpartisanship, will be addressed in later criteria. 

Snopes.com publishes multiple fact checks daily, as viewable on our “What’s New” page at https://www.snopes.com/latest/

I can confirm through a review of its website that Snopes publishes frequent fact checks, meeting the required minimum. As an example, on its What's New page, which I opened March 29, I scanned through its other fact checks and can verify Snopes regularly and consistently publishes fact checks. 

I reviewed the following fact checks, which I chose to try to get a breadth of fact checks from politics to social to cultural affairs. These will be used in other parts of the assessment are listed with the Snopes headline and date of publication (all 2022).

Did Biden Say Putin ‘Cannot Remain in Power’? March 28

Did McConnell Say ‘No Question’ Jackson Qualified, Then Say He Won’t Support Appointment? March 25

Are Costco Rotisserie Chickens Being Discontinued? March 22

Did Russia ‘Only Sanction Democrats’ and Not Republicans? March 18

No, the 2022 Olympics Aren’t Taking Place at Chernobyl February 9 

Snopes has no commercial, financial, or institutional relationship with any state agency, political party, politicians, or political candidates.  Snopes does not receive any funding or support from any state agencies (foreign or domestic) or political actors.

Snopes articulates its funding sources and explains its budget breakdown dating back to calendar year 2016. As an example, in the calendar year 2021, Snopes explained on its Disclosures page of its website: 

"CY 2021

In calendar year 2021, cash flow from SMG’s operations and financing was used as follows:

Employee compensation: 53%

Legal expenses: 28%

Technical support, development, consulting, and advertising services: 23%

Overhead and other expenses (e.g., equipment, travel, education, training, and interest payments): 13%" 

I have included its notice of its commercial operations--found easily under Disclosures--which I reviewed and which show how it receives money. None of that is disclosed as being from any state or political actors. In CY 2020, Snopes noted it received a donation from Wei-Hwa Huang, who is described as a "an award-winning American puzzle-maker" by the website boardgamegeek.com. 

This criteria does not apply. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/kyle-rittenhouse-biden/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/paul-gosar-moron-stupid-romney-tweet/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/democrats-names-troops-killed-kabul/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-putin-savvy-genius/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jesse-watters-faucis-assassination/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/queen-elizabeth-and-farting-horse/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sotomayor-100k-children-covid/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-border-wall/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-biden-say-my-butts-been-wiped/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-d-day/

We attempt to use non-partisan information and data sources (e.g., peer-reviewed journals, government agency statistics) as much as possible, and to alert readers that information and data from sources such as political advocacy organizations and partisan think tanks should be regarded with skepticism.

Any published sources (both paper and digital) that we quote, link to, use as background information for, or otherwise reference in our fact checks are listed in the Sources section at the foot of each fact check article. 

In cases where we have contacted individuals or organizations by e-mail or telephone for comment, that information is noted within the text of articles.

Snopes publishes a range of fact checks on a range of issues that includes politics, and I saw evidence that both Republican and Democratic claims/issues are regularly fact checked. Examples include: 

Yes, Trump Called Putin’s Ukraine Strategy ‘Savvy’ and ‘Genius’ February 24 and 

Did Biden Fail To Commemorate D-Day in 2021? June 9, 2021 and 

Is Biden Admin Restarting Border Wall Construction? April 7, 2021 

Furthermore, Snopes has separate sections of its website that explain how and why--not to mention if--a claim is selected and debunked/upheld. Snopes has a section online labeled with a subhead in bold called Topic Selection. It notes: 

"

Unlike many other sites in the online fact-checking world, at Snopes.com we do not exclusively focus on politics (although political fact-checking makes up a large portion of our work). We have long observed the principle that we write about whatever items the greatest number of readers are asking about or searching for at any given time, without any partisan considerations.

We don’t choose or exclude items for coverage based on whether they deal with Republican/Democratic, conservative/liberal, or religious/secular issues. We also don’t impose our own judgments about whether a given item’s perceived importance, controversiality, obviousness, or superficiality (or lack thereof) merit our addressing it.

We are, of course, limited in how much we can cover by our available resources and staffing.

The inputs we use to determine reader interest include the tabulation of terms entered into our search engine, reader email submissions, comments and questions posted to our Twitter and Facebook accounts, what’s trending on Google and social media sites.

The items we address come in forms that include (but are not limited to) text circulated online, social media posts, image macros/memes, videos, printed material, and articles from other sites and publications.

We don’t address, without exception, every single item that comes our way: we may decline to undertake a given topic because it is beyond our scope (e.g., answering the question “Does God exist?”) or represents a subject that is not relevant or appropriate for our site (e.g., speculating about a given celebrity’s sexual orientation)."

See “Topic Selection” section at https://www.snopes.com/transparency/

Unlike many other sites in the online fact-checking world, at Snopes.com we do not exclusively focus on politics (although political fact-checking makes up a large portion of our work). We have long observed the principle that we write about whatever items the greatest number of readers are asking about or searching for at any given time, without any partisan considerations.

We don’t choose or exclude items for coverage based on whether they deal with Republican/Democratic, conservative/liberal, or religious/secular issues. We also don’t impose our own judgments about whether a given item’s perceived importance, controversiality, obviousness, or superficiality (or lack thereof) merit our addressing it.

We are, of course, limited in how much we can cover by our available resources and staffing.

The inputs we use to determine reader interest include the tabulation of terms entered into our search engine, reader email submissions, comments and questions posted to our Twitter and Facebook accounts, what’s trending on Google and social media sites.

The items we address come in forms that include (but are not limited to) text circulated online, social media posts, image macros/memes, videos, printed material, and articles from other sites and publications.

We don’t address, without exception, every single item that comes our way: we may decline to undertake a given topic because it is beyond our scope (e.g., answering the question “Does God exist?”) or represents a subject that is not relevant or appropriate for our site (e.g., speculating about a given celebrity’s sexual orientation).

I confirm that Snopes under its Transparency page explains its corrections policy, methodology (including that its methods may differ depending on the type of issue under review), sources, and topic selection. From its Topic Selection page: 

"Unlike many other sites in the online fact-checking world, at Snopes.com we do not exclusively focus on politics (although political fact-checking makes up a large portion of our work). We have long observed the principle that we write about whatever items the greatest number of readers are asking about or searching for at any given time, without any partisan considerations.

We don’t choose or exclude items for coverage based on whether they deal with Republican/Democratic, conservative/liberal, or religious/secular issues. We also don’t impose our own judgments about whether a given item’s perceived importance, controversiality, obviousness, or superficiality (or lack thereof) merit our addressing it.

We are, of course, limited in how much we can cover by our available resources and staffing.

The inputs we use to determine reader interest include the tabulation of terms entered into our search engine, reader email submissions, comments and questions posted to our Twitter and Facebook accounts, what’s trending on Google and social media sites.

The items we address come in forms that include (but are not limited to) text circulated online, social media posts, image macros/memes, videos, printed material, and articles from other sites and publications.

We don’t address, without exception, every single item that comes our way: we may decline to undertake a given topic because it is beyond our scope (e.g., answering the question “Does God exist?”) or represents a subject that is not relevant or appropriate for our site (e.g., speculating about a given celebrity’s sexual orientation)."

Did Biden Fail To Commemorate D-Day in 2021? June 9, 2021 

Snopes rated this True, and its staff member explained that President Biden had faced criticism for not commemorating it. Snopes explained that it examined official and personal social media accounts to scan for acknowledgment. It also examined official White House briefings/transcripts/speeches. The fact check noted Jen Psaki had to acknowledge this and shared that Dr. Jill Biden and Vice President Harris both attended D-Day events. 

The fact check gives context, explains how it arrived at its conclusion, and showed its sources. 

Did Russia ‘Only Sanction Democrats’ and Not Republicans? March 18 

As in all of its fact checks, it provides reasoning for its rating, sources, and context. Snopes rated this Mostly True. It explained the reasoning for its rating here: 

What's True

The 311 Canadians sanctioned by Russian on March 15 included nearly all members of the House of Commons, including representatives from each of the five political parties. By contrast, of the 13 Americans sanctioned by Russia on March 15, none had pronounced ties to the Republican party, and many were either Democrats themselves or had a history of working for Democratic officeholders or candidates. However...

What's False

Only President Joe Biden and onetime presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had run for office or were elected as Democrats — the others were career government officials, appointees, or diplomats whose positions are, formally, non-partisan.

As noted on our Staff page at https://www.snopes.com/team/, "Members of our editorial staff are precluded from donating to, or participating in, political campaigns, political party activities, or political advocacy organizations."

As noted on our Disclosures page at https://www.snopes.com/disclosures/:

o Advertisers and vendors have no contact with the site’s editorial staff and do not in any way influence the content we publish.

o We do not accept political advertising, nor do we accept any other form of funding from political parties, political campaigns, or political advocacy groups.

o We accept contributions directly from our readers and from non-partisan organizations [only] to further our mission.

I have reviewed fact checks as well as how Snopes explains information about itself in various sections of its website. Here are two explains that demonstrate its commitment to nonpartisanship. 

At the bottom of its Our Team page, Snopes explains: "Note: Members of our editorial staff are precluded from donating to, or participating in, political campaigns, political party activities, or political advocacy organizations."

Furthermore, under its Sources section of the Transparency page, it explains, "We attempt to use non-partisan information and data sources (e.g., peer-reviewed journals, government agency statistics) as much as possible, and to alert readers that information and data from sources such as political advocacy organizations and partisan think tanks should be regarded with skepticism."

At the end of each fact check Snopes very clearly labels its sources. It also links to background information to provide resources to users to be able to find and to examine other materials it uses it in its fact checks. As an example, I reviewed the March 23, 2022 fact check Did Biden Admin Stage a White House Photo with Fake Trees?

It received a False label and showed tweets talking about the staged photo were "misleading." It used the following sources plus a photography news service GETTY IMAGES to explain. 

“Magnolia Plant.” Brittanica.com, https://www.britannica.com/plant/magnolia-plant.

Seale, William. The White House Garden. Washington, D.C. : White House Historical Association, 1996. Internet Archive, http://archive.org/details/whitehousegarden0000seal_y6h3.

Superville, Darlene. “Historic White House Magnolia Cut Back for Safety Reasons.” AP News, 27 Dec. 2017, https://apnews.com/article/83be516a65cb417eb400f87cfc9b14b4.

No, the 2022 Olympics Aren’t Taking Place at Chernobyl February 9 

Snopes said: "These photographs are real. However, the large structures in the background are part of an old steel mill, not a nuclear power plant."

Sources used here to give this a Miscaptioned rating included: 

Lianne Kolirin, Nectar Gan and Tom Booth. “Is That a Nuclear Plant? The Story behind Those Towers at the Winter Olympics Big Air.” CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/08/asia/ski-jump-winter-olympics-beijing-climate-hnk-intl/index.html. Accessed 9 Feb. 2022.

Feng, Emily. “A Closed Mill in Beijing No Longer Makes Steel but It Has Purpose in the Olympics.” NPR, 6 Jan. 2022. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2022/01/06/1070849371/a-closed-beijing-mill-no-longer-makes-steel-but-it-has-a-role-in-the-olympics.

No, the Olympics’ Big Air Ski Jump Isn’t next to a Beijing Nuclear Power Plant. https://www.sportingnews.com/hk/olympics/news/nuclear-plant-olympics-ski-jump/bezwjlfpdz68ec9c875fvzyk. Accessed 9 Feb. 2022.

Stanton, Andrew. “Why NBC Calls This Beijing Olympic Venue a Steel Mill, Not a Nuclear Plant.” Newsweek, 8 Feb. 2022, https://www.newsweek.com/why-nbc-calls-this-beijing-olympic-venue-steel-mill-not-nuclear-plant-1677255.

Did McConnell Say ‘No Question’ Jackson Qualified, Then Say He Won’t Support Appointment? March 25 

Snopes gives this a Correct Attribution rating. It used a source, which was McConnell saying the words on a Fox News radio program. Here's Snopes' explanation: 

McConnell made the “no question” remark about Jackson on March 2 during an interview on “The Guy Benson Show” on Fox News Radio. When asked by Benson if Jackson is qualified for the U.S. Supreme Court, McConnell answered: “Yes, yes. No question about that.”

These were the sources used to on March 16 fact check (given a Mostly False rating) a claim: Did Congress ‘Give Itself a 21% Raise’ in 2022? 

Here's the context from Snopes: 

What's True

In 2022, the omnibus spending bill included a 21 percent increase in the Members' Representational Allowance — which House members use to pay certain staff, and for travel and work-related expenses. However...

What's False

Congress members did not award themselves a pay raise — a very different proposition — in 2022 . The salary of the typical senator and representative has not changed since 2009.

And here are the sources: 

Americans Can’t Afford Gas, Congress Just Gave Itself a 21% Raise – Frontpagemag. https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2022/03/americans-cant-afford-gas-congress-just-gave-daniel-greenfield/. Accessed 16 Mar. 2022.

Kelly, Stephanie. “U.S. Gasoline Prices Edge Lower after Hitting Record High Last Week.” Reuters, 13 Mar. 2022. www.reuters.com, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-gasoline-prices-edge-lower-after-hitting-record-high-last-week-2022-03-13/.

“Legislative Branch Bill Boosts Members Representational Allowance, Capitol Police.” Roll Call, 9 Mar. 2022, https://www.rollcall.com/2022/03/09/legislative-branch-bill-boosts-members-representational-allowance-capitol-police/.

“Remarks by President Biden at Signing of H.R. 2471, ‘Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022.’” The White House, 15 Mar. 2022, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/03/15/remarks-by-president-biden-at-signing-of-h-r-2471-consolidated-appropriations-act-2022/.

Snopes is an independent organization.

I confirm its documents from the state of California show it is an independent entity. Attached as a part of the application, you will see a document confirming Snopes’ active status from California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber. 

Snopes has a detailed Disclosures page for calendar years 2016 through 2021 (at the time of this writing in May 2022) on its website. I have read through the website and it more than one spot, I note it mentions its independence as well as how its editorial team operates

Editorial control is vested with the writers and editors listed as Editorial staff at https://www.snopes.com/team/. Each article identifies in its byline whom it was written by. Our Transparency page at https://www.snopes.com/transparency/ also notes that "The final product will pass through the hands of at least one editor. Any piece that is not deemed up to our standards by one or more editors is subject to further revision and review before being released for publication."

This is clear. Any person reading the site would be able to understand its structure and how editorial control is exercised. 

All the members of the editorial staff have professional biographies that are linked from the bylines of every article they have written/published:

https://www.snopes.com/author/snopes/

https://www.snopes.com/author/doreen/

https://www.snopes.com/author/david-emery/

https://www.snopes.com/author/jordan/

https://www.snopes.com/author/alex/

https://www.snopes.com/author/dan/

https://www.snopes.com/author/danmacguill/

https://www.snopes.com/author/bethania/

https://www.snopes.com/author/nuribrahim/

https://www.snopes.com/author/jessicalee/

https://www.snopes.com/author/madison/

Clearly explained. Here is an example that shows the depth and professional standing of its staff:  

Nur Nasreen Ibrahim is a journalist from Lahore, Pakistan, based in New York City. She started her career as an associate producer with Al Jazeera English's “The Stream,” covering a range of local and international stories. She was a segment producer with Comedy Central's “The Opposition with Jordan Klepper,” where she spent too much time watching “InfoWars.” She was also a news producer with Netflix's “Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj,” where she tackled stories about Saudi Arabia, India's elections, oil, and more. She has written and produced as a freelancer for a variety of publications, including Middle East Eye, The Juggernaut, and Catapult. Just because she worked in comedy does not mean she's funny. But if you like reading sad stories about women, she also writes fiction.

https://www.snopes.com/faqs/#faq-question-1627191065267

"We always welcome reader tips and queries. Send us links to articles, social media posts, or images using our contact form. If you have screenshots or other relevant attachments, use the 'Add File' button on the contact form. Include as much information as possible, including when and where you found the item you hope to see fact-checked."

NOTE: We don't provide a means for the public to communicate directly with members of our editorial staff due to the large amount of spamming, abusive, and threatening messages they receive.

Snopes has a page on its site where it encourages participation. Any reader/user would see that page and understand that they could contact Snopes’ staff.

Furthermore, at 1:25 p.m. EST on March 29, I used the contact form to submit an inquiry stating that I was an IFCN assessor. I immediately received an automated confirmation the message was received. 

See the "Methodology" section at https://www.snopes.com/transparency/

The methodology section of its Transparency page is clear. There, a Snopes reader would find the following statement on this important fact checking area:

"Methodology

Since the material we tackle can range from everything to analyzing whether an image has been digitally manipulated to explicating the text of a Congressional bill, we can’t describe any single method that applies to all of our fact-checking.

In general, each entry is assigned to one of the members of our editorial staff who undertakes the preliminary research and writes the first draft of the fact-check.

Our research begins with (whenever possible) attempting to contact the source of the claim for elaboration and supporting information. We also attempt to contact individuals and organizations who would be knowledgeable about, or have relevant expertise in, the subject at hand, as well as searching out printed information (news articles, scientific and medical journal articles, books, interview transcripts, statistical sources) with bearing on the topic.

Depending upon the nature and complexity of the topic, other members of the editorial staff may contribute additional research (or their own personal expertise) and editing. The final product will pass through the hands of at least one editor. Any piece that is not deemed up to our standards by one or more editors is subject to further revision and review before being released for publication."

In fact checking Did Congress ‘Give Itself a 21% Raise’ in 2022?, Snopes explained how the claim came about and where it was circulating. Then, it explained how the 21% figure likely came about--coming from the Members Representational Allowance, which it defined and explained. It also hyperlinked to a Congressional Research Service report explaining more. It also used the text of a omnibus spending bill to further explain how it arrived at its conclusion. 

Did Biden Fail To Commemorate D-Day in 2021? lists a clear methodology to fact check this claim. It explains the use of official records and social media accounts linked to Biden that are both professional and personal. 

Bad Deepfake of Zelenskyy Shared on Ukraine News Site in Reported Hack March 16 

Snopes verified the Ukrainian TV station had been hacked plus explained the terrible composition of the Ukrainian leader thus an easy giveaway of an online deepfake. Further, they explained: "If you see a video that you think might be fake, try taking a screenshot from the video and then running a reverse-image search on Google Images, TinEye, or another reverse-image search engine. You can also send the video to Snopes and we’ll do our best to authenticate it." 

Did the Oscars Not Offer Closed Captions Until 2021? March 28 

This fact checked a viral claim in the aftermath of the 2022 Oscars ceremony. It gave a false rating, and it explained a pretty straightforward methodology in doing so, which was to search for reputable news organizations covering when closed captioning started:

"On March 27, 1982, Wisconsin’s Leader-Telegram newspaper published that a brand new way of providing captions during live television would be debuting at that year’s Oscars:

A new method for providing closed captioning for hearing-impaired viewers will be unveiled by the National Captioning Institute during ABC-TV coverage of the 54th annual Academy Awards presentations March 29.

Called Real Time, the method is a form of electronic computerized shorthand which will allow hearing-impaired viewers to receive closed captions throughout the entire telecast, including acceptance speeches the moment they are spoken.

NCI spokesman John E. D. Ball said Real Time involves a courtroom style stenotype machine and a computer capable of transmitting phonetic symbols into words." Here's another example of multiple sourcing, too. 

Associated Press. “3 Networks Start Captioned TV for the Deaf.” Chicago Tribune, 16 Mar. 1980, https://www.newspapers.com/image/386898773/.

“Closed Captions for Oscars.” Leader-Telegram, 27 Mar. 1982, https://www.newspapers.com/image/360437555/.

Ebert, Roger. Coming Home Movie Review & Film Summary (1978). 1 Jan. 1978, https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/coming-home-1978.

Jane Fonda Winning Best Actress. 51st Oscars (1979), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL_73XeE8fo. 

https://www.snopes.com/faqs/#faq-question-1627191065267

"We always welcome reader tips and queries. Send us links to articles, social media posts, or images using our contact form. If you have screenshots or other relevant attachments, use the 'Add File' button on the contact form. Include as much information as possible, including when and where you found the item you hope to see fact-checked. Due to the volume of correspondence we receive every day, we regret that we may not be able to respond to your request personally."

This is clear, and as I stated above, I tried out the online tip system to make sure it was working. (I put in the tip line "I am an IFCN assessor.") Furthermore, Snopes is clear that it may not be able to get to all tips, nor can it fact check the existence of phenomena like God. See below from its Transparency page found here: https://www.snopes.com/transparency/

We don’t address, without exception, every single item that comes our way: we may decline to undertake a given topic because it is beyond our scope (e.g., answering the question “Does God exist?”) or represents a subject that is not relevant or appropriate for our site (e.g., speculating about a given celebrity’s sexual orientation).

See the "Corrections Policy" section at https://www.snopes.com/transparency/

Our policy is to promptly correct errors of fact and to clarify any potentially confusing or ambiguous statements in our articles. Readers can submit potential corrections through the Contact form; those submissions will be routed to an editor for evaluation and action.

Whenever we change the rating of a fact check (for any reason), correct or modify a substantive supporting fact (even if it does not affect the item’s overall rating), or add substantial new information to an existing article, those changes are noted and explained in an Update box at the foot of the article.

Corrections of typographical errors, misspellings, or other minor revisions not deemed substantive by our editors are not noted.

It has a clear corrections policy found on its Transparency page here https://www.snopes.com/transparency/. Its corrections policy states:

“Corrections Policy

Our policy is to promptly correct errors of fact and to clarify any potentially confusing or ambiguous statements in our articles. Readers can submit potential corrections through the Contact form; those submissions will be routed to an editor for evaluation and action.

Whenever we change the rating of a fact check (for any reason), correct or modify a substantive supporting fact (even if it does not affect the item’s overall rating), or add substantial new information to an existing article, those changes are noted and explained in an Update box at the foot of the article.

Corrections of typographical errors, misspellings, or other minor revisions not deemed substantive by our editors are not noted.”

Snopes' correction policy: 

"Our policy is to promptly correct errors of fact and to clarify any potentially confusing or ambiguous statements in our articles. Readers can submit potential corrections through the Contact form; those submissions will be routed to an editor for evaluation and action.

Whenever we change the rating of a fact check (for any reason), correct or modify a substantive supporting fact (even if it does not affect the item’s overall rating), or add substantial new information to an existing article, those changes are noted and explained in an Update box at the foot of the article.

Corrections of typographical errors, misspellings, or other minor revisions not deemed substantive by our editors are not noted."

I reviewed several corrections from the last year and note that they appear with an Editor's Note explaining why a rating was changed or information updated. 

Here are several examples of fact checks in which the rating was adjusted and/or the text of the fact check was updated in response to correction requests:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tom-cotton-army-ranger/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/drone-video-bear-snow/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/austin-285m-contracts/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-crack-pipes-racial-equity/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-check-watch-13/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/msnbc-rittenhouse-jury-bus/

Its corrections are clearly labeled, and context is given to correct the record when needed. As an example, in this piece from February 2022 headlined “Did Biden Admin…”, you can see how it explained a new rating based on new details.

“[Editor’s note: This article has been updated after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services stipulated that federal funding would not be used to include pipes in the safe smoking kits to be distributed as part of a substance abuse harm reduction program. As a result of that newly-stipulated detail, Snopes has changed its rating from “Mostly False” to “Outdated.”] “

N/A: Snopes is not an existing signatory.

This does not apply. 

N/A: Snopes is not the fact-checking unit of a media company.

This does not apply.