The function of Snopes is to address rumors that are flying around the Internet (originally via chain emails, now via Twitter/Facebook), not to address every c

The function of Snopes is to address rumors that are flying around the Internet (originally via chain emails, now via Twitter/Facebook), not to address every claim anyone has ever made about something. I didn't make that up, it's right on the Snopes site: "...we fact-check whatever items the greatest number of readers are asking about or searching for at any given time" (https://www.snopes.com/faq/decide-fact-check https://www.snopes.com/faq/decide-fact-check) If the claim that was flying around the Internet at the time was that Rosenberg is a convicted terrorist, that's the appropriate one to address. I certainly don't claim that Snopes is perfect, or that their choices never exhibit political bias or bad judgment. But I think this case is an odd one to pick as the key evidence that Snopes is untrustworthy.