IRS Notification: Rejected Federal Tax Return/Payment or Notice of Refund
Phishing bait:  Notice from the IRS indicating the recipient's electronic tax return or payment has been rejected or that the recipient has a refund coming. Examples:   [Collected via e-mail, October 2010] Subject: Your Federal Tax Payment ID 010357109 is rejected.  Urgent Report. Your Federal Tax Payment ID: 01037524 has been rejected. Return Reason Code R21 - The identification number used in the Company Identification Field is not valid. Please, check the information and refer to Code R21 to get details about your company payment in transaction contacts section: EFTPS: The Electronic Federal Tax Payment System PLEASE NOTE: Your tax payment is due regardless of EFTPS online availability. In case of an emergency, you can always make your tax payment by calling the EFTPS.  [Collected via e-mail, January 2008] After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity we have determined that you are eligible to receive a Stimulus Payment. Please submit the Stimulus Payment Online Form in order to process it. A Stimulus Payment can be delayed for a variety of reasons.For example submitting invalid records or applying after the deadline. To submit your Stimulus Payment form, please download the document attached to your email. Note: If filing or preparation fees were deducted from your 2007 Refund or you received a refund anticipation loan, you will be receiving a check instead of a direct deposit. Regards,Internal Revenue Servicestimulus.payment@irs.gov  [Collected via e-mail, August 2007] From: "Internal Revenue Service" Subject: IRS Notification - Fiscal ActivityDate: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 23:57:35 +0300 After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity we have determined that you are eligible to receive a tax refund of $268.32. Please submit the tax refund request and allow us 6-9 days in order to process it. A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons. For example submitting invalid records or applying after the deadline. To access the form for your tax refund, please click here Regards,Internal Revenue Service Copyright 2007, Internal Revenue Service U.S.A. All rights reserved.  [Collected via e-mail, February 2009] Re: US Stimulus Check Information--------------------------------------------------------------------If you're one of the millions of Americans struggling in today's economy, help is available. You've been chosen for the chance to get a US Stimulus Check based on your annual income level. (Participation required. See below for details.) Refer to the chart below to determine the amount of money you can receive: --------------------------------------------------------------------$0 - $35,000........................$709 US Stimulus Check--------------------------------------------------------------------$35,000 - $70,000.................$615 US Stimulus Check--------------------------------------------------------------------$70,000+.............................$504 US Stimulus Check--------------------------------------------------------------------  Make your selection here, then follow the instructions on our website before this offer expires.  [Collected via e-mail, July 2009] Tax Refund Notification After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity, we have determined that you are eligible to receive tax refund of 488.50 GBP. You are require to submit the tax refund request using the tax refund reference below and allow up 6-9 working days in order to process it [link elided] Note : A refund can be delayed for different reasons, for example submitting invalid records or applying after deadline. we apologise for any inconveniences and thank you for your co-operation. Yours Sincerely HM Revenue & Customs  [Collected via e-mail, June 2011] Department of Treasury Internal Revenue Source Important information about your tax return We are unable to process your tax return We recived your tax return. However, we are unable to process the return as field. Our records indicate that the person identified as the primary taxpayer or spouse on the tax return did not provided all the required documents shown on the tax form. Our records are based on information received from the Social Security Administration. Based on this information, the tax account for the individual has been locked  What you need to do Print out the attached notification and list of missing documents, fill it in, add the documents and send the following information to the adress shown in the attached notification. List of required documents: 1. A copy of this letter 2. Notification letter 3. A photocopy of valid U.S. Federal or State Government issued identification. Keep this notice for your records. If you need assistance, please don'thesitate to contact us  [Collected via e-mail, January 2012] IRS notice, The analysis of the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity has indicated that you are entitled to receive a tax refund of $115.25 Please submit a request of the tax refund and a processing of the request will take 7-14 days. A tax refund can be delayed by different reasons. For instance submission of invalid records or sending after the deadline. Please find the form of your tax refund attached and fill out it and send a report. Regards,Internal Revenue Service. Origins:  Notices purporting to come from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) make good  phishing bait for a number of reasons: phishing  Notices from institutions of the federal government (especially an agency with the ominous reputation of the IRS) grab people's attention.  Unlike other phishing schemes that emulate mailings from various private financial institutions (e.g., Bank of America) and are therefore easily recognized as phony by many recipients (because they do no business with those companies), a forged IRS notice has the potential to take in a much larger pool of victims, as most adult U.S. residents have dealings with that agency.  Many people find the federal income tax filing process complicated and confusing, so the idea that they might have unclaimed refunds or payments waiting for them to claim seems plausible. An August 2007 mass phish e-mailing (reprised in January 2012) took advantage of those points, spamming millions of Internet users with phony notices that advised recipients they were eligible to receive tax refunds (of amounts such as $109.30 or $268.32) and invited them to click on a link that took them to a form  through which they could claim those refunds.  Of course, the link included in the messages didn't actually send users to the genuine IRS web site; it redirected claimants to an imposter site that instructed them to enter sensitive personal information (e.g., Social Security number and debit card number) in order to "deposit" their refunds.   Similarly, January 2009 versions redirected claimants to an imposter site with a form for them to fill out in order to claim stimulus payments, and an October 2010 version used the lure of claiming that the recipients' Electronic Federal Tax Payments (EFTPS) had been rejected due to invalid information and sent them to a phony imitation of the real EFTPS site to enter new information. The IRS never offers refunds through e-mail or sends out unsolicited e-mails to taxpayers.   When the IRS needs to contact a taxpayer, it sends notice via U.S. Mail, and every such notice includes a telephone number that the recipient can call for confirmation.  Should you need to visit the IRS web site for any reason, go there directly (by entering the www.irs.gov URL into your web browser) rather than following links in e-mail messages. The IRS says about such e-mails that: IRS The IRS does not initiate taxpayer communications through e-mail. In addition, the IRS does not request detailed personal information through e-mail or ask taxpayers for the PIN numbers, passwords or similar secret access information for their credit card, bank or other financial accounts.  Do not open any attachments to questionable e-mails, which may contain malicious code that will infect your computer. Please be advised that the IRS does not initiate contact with taxpayers via e-mails. The EFTPS web site also states that: EFTPS EFTPS values your privacy and security and will never attempt to contact you via e-mail. If you ever receive an e-mail that claims to be from EFTPS or from a sender you do not recognize that mentions a payment made through EFTPS, forward the e-mail to phishing@irs.gov or call the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration at 1.800.366.4484. Last updated:  9 January 2012
In May 2018, right-wing blogs pounced on a New York Post story concerning alleged campaign contribution violations by actress and comedian Rosie O'Donnell. According to the Post, the former co-host of The View exceeded the $2,700 limit on individual campaign contributions in donations to several Democratic Party candidates via the fundraising web site ActBlue, while using five different New York addresses and four variations of her name. According The report also said that O'Donnell donated $90,000 to 50 different committees and candidates for federal office. O'Donnell reportedly told the Post via email that she did "nothing nefarious," adding that she did not choose to donate over the limit. The newspaper also quoted her as saying: My anxiety is quelled by donating to those opposing trump [and] his agenda  especially at night  when most of these were placed. Conservative bloggers seized on that remark to accuse O'Donnell of "pleading insanity": accuse Trump-hating liberal Rosie ODonnell has accused President Trump of many bogus crimes. She has been obsessed with trying to accuse President Trump of nonsense. She has became completely obsessed with President Trump. Her Twitter feed is filled with incohrrent [sic] rants. Now the Trump curse continues as she is pleading insanity in hopes of not paying the penalty for breaking campaign finance laws. She is facing criminal charges thanks to a campaign finance scheme. In fact, there has been no announcement of an investigation into the alleged donations, let alone "criminal charges." The Federal Election Commission did not comment on the Post's report. While the Post's report has been aggregated by blogs and other news outlets, no second source has emerged corroborating its findings. An ActBlue spokesperson, Chris Fleming, did not comment on the story, but did tell us: ActBlue does not allow over the limit contributions in any one transaction, and ActBlue offers donors the option of saving all their info in an account where they can track their cumulative giving through ActBlue and compare/add to offline giving. While the Post reported that FEC violations only rarely lead to penalties, Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson said that it can depend on the jurisdiction. "For instance, some cities and states are much more aggressive about finding and fining people for these violations than others," said Levinson, who focuses on campaign finance in her work: On the federal level, it is true that the Federal Election Commission is a model of inaction. I think it would be fair to say that fines are not common, but I'm not really convinced that these types of violations are terrifically common. For her part, O'Donnell accused the Post on Twitter of employing "sinister ways to warp the truth." She also posted a photograph depicting her contributions on the ActBlue platform, listed at 66 donations totaling $75,500: Twitter   She told the Post that candidates should refund donation money that exceeds the individual limit, adding, "I don't look to see who I can donate most to.... I just donate assuming they do not accept what is over the limit." FEC regulations state that campaign committees that receive individual donations over the $2,700 limit have 60 days to refund the excess amount, redesignate it toward another election, or reattribute the money to someone else. In the event of a redesignation or reattribution, the contributor must be notified of the committee's intent and offered the chance to collect a refund instead. state The newspaper's report centered on contributions from O'Donnell to two current Democratic congressional candidates  Lauren Underwood in Illinois and Omar Vaid in New York  as well as campaigns for three current lawmakers from the same party: Rep. Adam Schiff from California; Doug Jones of Alabama; and Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania. Lamb's campaign will reportedly contact O'Donnell and offer to either refund or redesignate her excess contributions; Vaid's told the Post that it would amend its filings. A spokesperson for Underwood told us: Because of the data point differences in name, address, and employer, our systems did not flag these contributions as totaling above the limit. In the coming weeks, we will be amending our report. Bloggers also attempted to compare O'Donnell's purported violations to the outright illegal donations that led to the 2014 conviction of right-wing documentarian Dinesh D'Souza. D'Souza was sentenced to five years probation and eight months in a halfway house after pleading guilty to making illegal contributions in the names of others. D'Souza asked two friends and their partners to donate $10,000 apiece in 2012 toward Republican Wendy Long's senatorial candidate. sentenced "I do think we could find a distinction between what D'Souza was charged with  making a contribution of about 10 times the legal limit  with what O'Donnell is accused of  making a total of $5,400 in contributions over the legal limit to five different candidates," Levinson said. "O'Donnell's error seems more believably to be one of ignorance, while it is hard to believe that D'Souza believed a $20,000 contribution was legal." Sanders, Anna. "Rosie O'Donnell's Campaign Donations to Dems Went Over Legal Limit."
  New York Post. 5 May 2018. Federal Election Commission. "Remedying an Excessive contribution." Federal Bureau of Investigations. "Dinesh D'Souza Sentenced in Manhattan Federal Court to Five Years of Probation for Campaign Finance Fraud."
  23 September 2014. In February 2021, several readers asked Snopes to examine the authenticity and accuracy of online posts which claimed that Coca-Cola had given its employees diversity training that included slides encouraging them to "try to be less white." On Feb. 19, the Twitter account @LeftyMoment posted a widely shared tweet which contained the caption "This was in Coca-Cola's diversity training" along with an image that appeared to be composed of two screenshots: one showing a presentation slide with the words "Try to be less white"; and the other with a list of "white" traits, explaining that "to be less white" means being "less oppressive," "less arrogant," "less certain" and so on:   Those and other similar images appeared to have been leaked by a Coca-Cola employee to Karlyn Borysenko, a prominent online opponent of critical race theory and many aspects of corporate diversity training, who describes herself on LinkedIn as an organizational pyschologist and "executive/performance coach." LinkedIn Borysenko shared the screenshots on Feb. 19, consistently characterizing them as having been part of required training for Coca-Cola employees. As proof of this, she cited the Coca-Cola logo visible in the top right-hand corner of the screen. shared The screenshots were also shared on the controversial 4Chan thread /pol/, a frequent online source of political disinformation in recent years. Nigel Farage, former leader of the far-right UK Independence Party, mentioned the story in a YouTube video, saying Coca-Cola had "lost their marbles" by "putting their staff through compulsory training on 'How to be less white.'" shared on controversial mentioned The presentation in question is real, and the "try to be less white" slides were authentic. However, the evidence presented by Borysenko and others does not prove that Coca-Cola included the presentation in its required diversity training for employees, and the company has explicitly denied that claim. The slides contained in the widely-shared online posts in February 2021 came from a presentation entitled "Confronting Racism," which featured Robin DiAngelo, a writer and consultant whose work on racism has proven controversial and who has been hired to conduct diversity and anti-racism training for many American companies.  work controversial The course was created by Big Think, an educational video platform, using footage taken from an earlier interview they conducted with DiAngelo. "Confronting Racism" had been available on LinkedIn Learning, but was removed on Feb. 23, on foot of a request by the producers of the course Big Think, and representatives for DiAngelo. Before it was taken down, it carried the following description: available In this course, Robin DiAngelo, the best-selling author of White Fragility, gives you the vocabulary and practices you need to start confronting racism and unconscious bias at the individual level and throughout your organization. Theres no magic recipe for building an inclusive workplace. Its a process that needs to involve people of color, and that needs to go on for as long as your companys in business. But with these tools at your disposal, youll be well on your way. The slides in question appeared during the "What you can do" section of the course:     Those slides appeared as part of a video, which the screenshots shared widely in February 2021 did not fully reflect. In that section of the video, DiAngelo provides the following narration: I try to be a little less white. I'm really clear that I'm not going to be free of my conditioning and racism is not going to end in my lifetime. The question I ask myself is "How do I do a little less harm?" and "How do I know?" right? Am I, in any given moment, behaving in anti-racist ways? Not "I'm already done, I'm never racist." Not "I'm a terrible person, I'm always racist." In any given moment, how am I doing? And how do I know? And that keeps me humble, and it keeps me accountable. So for me, to do less harm is no small thing. Because it could literally be one more hour on a person of color's life, who didn't have to take home my nonsense and agonize all night long whether it was worth it to talk to me, or they should just suck it up yet again, lest they risk my lashing out in defensiveness. So for me to be "less white" is to be less oppressive, racially. To be less arrogant, to be less certain, to be less defensive, to be less ignorant, quite frankly. To be more humble, to listen, to believe, to break with apathy, to break with white solidarity. It's not easy, it's a lifelong process. But nothing is more rewarding.  LinkedIn Learning is a service provided to LinkedIn members with a paid "Premium" subscription. Users do not purchase individual videos, but rather their premium membership gives them access to all the additional content contained in the LinkedIn Learning platform: videos; courses; and "learning paths." This is an important feature of LinkedIn Learning, in the context of the controversy prompted by Borysenko's tweets and YouTube videos about Coca-Cola. In a news release published on Feb. 20, Coca-Cola stated that "Confronting Racism" "was not part of the company's curriculum," meaning it was not something Coca-Cola obliged its employees to view. Rather, the company said, its training involved use of LinkedIn Learning, and the course was accessible there. news release So a company employee could log into a Coca-Cola LinkedIn account in order to watch videos that are part of their mandatory diversity training, but then navigate, within LinkedIn Learning, to "Confronting Racism," which need not be required viewing in order for them to access it. This would allow them to create screenshots that feature slides from the course, alongside a Coca-Cola logo in the top right-hand corner. So, contrary to Borysenko's claim, the presence of the logo was not proof that "Confronting Racism" was required viewing for company employees, merely that someone at Coca-Cola had viewed it. We asked Coca-Cola to provide details of the company's "diversity, equity and inclusion training." A company spokesperson did not provide a comprehensive curriculum, but did provide Snopes several examples of topics included as required viewing. Each of the following items appears to match individual videos available through the LinkedIn Learning platform:  Fundamentals Six steps unconscious bias impact brave allyship The spokesperson also provided further clarification about Coca-Cola's use of LinkedIn Learning in company trainings: "On learning channels not owned by The Coca-Cola Company, users had the ability to navigate outside of the intended curriculum which may have given the false impression that certain videos were part of the training." The controversy appears to have been caused by a fundamental misunderstanding, on the part of Borysenko and others, as to how LinkedIn Learning works, and the fact that Coca-Cola employees could, while taking part in their mandatory training, access hundreds of videos and courses that bore no relation to that training, and were not required. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that, despite Coca-Cola's clear denials, the existence of a coherent alternative explanation, and despite the complete absence of evidence so far, "Confronting Racism" was in fact listed on the curriculum.  [Correction]: Feb. 23, 2021. This fact check previously inaccurately described Robin DiAngelo as the producer of the video course "Confronting Racism." In fact, the course was produced by Big Think, using video footage taken from an earlier interview with DiAngelo. Claim:  Amazon is giving out free $200 gift cards to Facebook users.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, October 2014] Amazon, it appears, is offering a $200 gift card if you "like" their page and comment about your appreciation.  Is this for real?  How exactly would they pay up??  If you like it, it posts to your facebook stream and other people see it and automatically trust you and click on like and share as well. Origins:  In October 2014, a fraudulent offer for a free $200 Amazon gift card started circulating on Facebook.  The message contained a link which redirected bargain hunters to a website adorned with Amazon's logo. That website, however, had no affiliation with the retail giant. It was also marked as "High Risk" by Scam Adviser. Scam Adviser  The $200 Amazon gift card scam is very similar to recent schemes which targeted Costco and Kroger shoppers. While each scam has slight variations, they all feature three main components. First, they require people to like or share the message on Facebook in an attempt to spread the scam around the Internet. Second, they direct people to complete a fraudulent survey which extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth and credit card numbers. Lastly, these scams never end with a free monetary gift card.  Costco Kroger The Better Business Bureau gave these three tips to identify scams on Facebook: Facebook Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.  Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy.  Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. This isn't the first time that a Facebook scam has targeted Amazon shoppers. A similar scheme circulated around the social networking site in 2011 and again in 2012.  2011 2012   Last updated:  23 October 2014 In herBack To Workcampaign ad, General Treasurer Gina Raimondo, one of four Democrats running for governor, stated that her former venture capital firm, Point Judith Capital, helped create more than 1,000 jobs when she was partner. She made the same claim while campaigning for treasurer in the 2010 election. (Raimondo left the firm the day she took office; her investments there are held in a blind trust. The company has been relocated to Boston.) The ad shows Raimondo atNabsys, a biomedical company in Providence. Before I was State Treasurer, my Rhode Island business helped create over 1,000 jobs, including here at Nabsys, a biomedical company, Raimondo said. As governor, Ill use this as a model for how we create manufacturing jobs. Ill bring colleges and industry together to develop new products in marine science, green technology, and medical devices, and to train our workers to fill those jobs  We need to get Rhode Islanders back to work. This week, Raimondo reiterated that claimin a new TV adabout how she helped bring back Narragansett Beer, originally brewed in Rhode Island until the brewery closed for good in 1983. (I helped create over a thousand jobs, from high tech to making beer ) Before we get started,lets be clear about one thing. Venture capital firms such as Point Judith are not in the business of creating jobs. Their mission is to make money for their investors -- and themselves. They do so by raising money from entities such as private investors and public pension funds, and then investing it in startup companies, hoping for a big return if those companies take off. If the companies succeed and grow, they add jobs. But thats not the goal of the venture capitalists. To support her claim, Raimondo sent us a list of 21 companies that Point Judith Capital invested in and how many jobs those investments -- and the companys efforts -- helped create during the time she was a partner. They add up to 1,063. The list was produced by Point Judith Capital in late 2010, in preparation for her run for treasurer. We also interviewed Raimondo. She described Point Judith Capitals role as an early-stage investor. Typically, you sit on the board of the company, provide a lot of hand-holding and strategic advice, you help recruit people, and get the bank loan. Its hands-on. Thats why we say helped create those jobs. We had to have invested money in the company, which means we had an ownership stake in the company  In every case we either had a board seat and additionally were just very involved in building the business, writing the business plan, helping to get customers. Raimondo said, In these cases, we invested millions of dollars. Initially she said that was more than two million in each of those companies. On Wednesday, Raimondo campaign manager Eric Hyers said Raimondo had misspoke. The investments were all at least six figures; they ranged from roughly $400,000 to $2 million or more. Raimondo noted that many of the companies have expanded and added jobs since then. Next, we attempted to callall 21 companies. Many were from out of state. Some had been bought out, and we were unable to reach the principals who worked there when Point Judith Capital was involved. At least one appears to have since closed. Of the representatives of seven companies we reached, all essentially confirmed Raimondos claims, representing roughly 480 jobs. In one case, the job number appeared to fall slightly short; in another, a CEO gave Raimondo credit for more than the number of jobs she cited. We spoke with Mark Hellendrung, president ofNarragansett Brewing Co. The company is based in Providence. Hellendrung said the beer is now brewed in Rochester, N.Y., Pawcatuck, Conn., Westport, Mass. Test batches have been brewed locally in Rhode Island. Raimondo claimed Point Judith helped create 10 jobs there, and invested more than $1 million. Hellendrung confirmed that Point Judith Capital helped launch the company (which put the famous Narragansett lager beer back on the shelves) with slightly less than $2 million venture capital nine years ago, and active involvement. Weve got over 10 full-time people, and routinely weve got over 20 part-time people that work promotions and events  Its been a labor of love and a ton of fun and Gina was very helpful in that process, Hellendrung said. We spoke with Michael ONeil Jr., founder and CEO ofGetWellNetwork, a health care technology company headquartered in Maryland. Raimondo claimed Point Judith Capital helped create 121 jobs there. Shes totally correct, ONeil said. Gina and I met just as the company was getting started. Her leadership helped us get off the ground and helped get hundreds of jobs. Those included software engineers and project managers; others were on the services side, ONeil said. Donna Dooley,chief financial officer at MedOptions, said that the 185 jobs that Raimondo credits Point Judith Capital with helping to create sounds accurate. Dooley joined MedOptions in 2011, the year after Raimondo left Point Judith Capital, and by then it was about 250 employees, she said. MedOptions provides behavioral health services in southern New England and the Mid-Atlantic. I know that Point Judith Capital and another investment company put money in  I do think its fair to say that there was a fair amount of job creation at that time, Dooley said. Steven J. Tallarida, cofounder of the former Spirus Medical, said Raimondo probably sold herself short by listing nine as the number of jobs Point Judith Capital helped create at that medical device company. It was probably around 20, Tallarida said in a phone interview. Those included research and development, manufacturing and sales jobs. Point Judith Capital invested a couple of million. Raimondo sat on the board, and she would give governance on how to do things, Tallarida said. (The Massachusetts-based company was sold in 2011 to the Tokyo-based Olympus Corp.) Genevieve Thiers,who cofoundedSittercity, wrote in an email that Point Judith Capital put in $2.5 million and led our Series A round. Due to them and the other $2.5 million  we were able to grow from 20 employees to about 80. (Raimondo credited her former company with helping to create 80 jobs at Sittercity, a nationwide babysitter-matching website). Thiers added, That money did not start the company but it was needed for a pivotal stage in growth. Thiers has since left the company but remains on the board. Dr. Barrett Bready,Nabsyscofounder and CEO, said in an email that Point Judith Capital was the first venture capital firm to invest in the company, and the firm has continued to invest in subsequent financing rounds. Raimondo formerly held a board seat. Nabsys currently has 40 employees: the number Raimondo credits her former company with helping to create. Bob Lentz, founder of the former PermissionTV, in Waltham, Mass., wrote in an email that Point Judith Capital was actively involved. Raimondo said her firm helped create 40 jobs there. Lentz wrote, Its been a few years but the numbers sound right. (PermissionTV has been relaunched as VisibleGains). Our ruling: Gina Raimondo said her former firm, Point Judith Capital, helped create more than 1,000 jobs when she was a partner there. She produced a list of 21 companies and a precise number of jobs. We reached representatives of seven companies -- most of them cofounders and/or CEOs. They confirmed that Point Judith capital invested several million dollars - give or take - in each case; held board positions and as such, helped create jobs. The jobs numbers added to roughly 480 at those companies. While we were unable to reach all the companies Raimondo listed, the responses from the companies we did reach supported her qualified claim that Point Judith helped create 1,000 jobs. We rate Raimondos claim True. (If you have a claim you'd like us to check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.) On April 29, 2020, a large asteroid is expected to fly by earth at a distance of approximately 4 million miles. That may be of interest to stargazers, but the previous sentence isn't very alarming or attention-grabbing. Yet many media outlets wrote headlines about this incoming asteroid as if it posed an immediate and catastrophic threat to the planet. An article in the Daily Express, for instance, was headlined: "Asteroid warning: NASA tracks a 4KM asteroid approach - Could end civilisation if it hits." The site used a similar message when promoting this article on Twitter:  headlined   While these headlines may bring clicks, they also may lead readers to falsely believe that this asteroid poses an immediate threat to life on Earth. That isn't the case. While Asteroid 52768 (1998 OR2) will approach Earth in April 2020, the asteroid is not expected to come within 3.9 million miles of the planet.  NASA is constantly monitoring the skies for asteroids and meteors that pose a potential threat to Earth. When these near-Earth objects (NEOs) are discovered, NASA monitors them to find out when they will approach Earth, how fast they will be traveling, how large they are, and how close they will get. All of this data is publicly available on the Center for Near Earth Object Studies (CNEOS) website.  Center for Near Earth Object Studies Asteroid 52768 (1998 OR2) was first discovered (as its name implies) in 1998, so this asteroid isn't making a sudden and scary appearance above Earth. NASA has been monitoring it for more than two decades and has learned quite a bit. For instance, the asteroid is relatively large with a diameter between 1.1 and 2.5 miles, and it will be traveling at just under 20,000 mph when it makes its closest approach to Earth.  discovered While an asteroid of this size would cause catastrophic damage if it hit Earth, there's practically no chance that will happen in April 2020. According to NASA, this asteroid won't come within 3.9 million miles of Earth. In other words, it will approach no closer than about 16 times the distance between us and the moon. Asteroid Watch, the official Twitter account of the CNEOS, attempted to quell fears about this asteroid, writing that it will "safely pass" Earth and that NASA did not issue a "warning" about a possible catastrophic collision. Asteroid 52768 (1998 OR2) is not currently listed on NASA's list of potential future Earth impact events.  Twitter account  potential future Earth impact events CNEOS writes (emphasis ours):  CNEOS  On a daily basis, about one hundred tons of interplanetary material drifts down to the Earths surface. Most of the smallest interplanetary particles that reach the Earths surface are the tiny dust particles that are released by comets as their ices vaporize in the solar neighborhood. The vast majority of the larger interplanetary material that reaches the Earths surface originates as the collision fragments of asteroids that have run into one another some eons ago. With an average interval of about 10,000 years, rocky or iron asteroids larger than about 100 meters would be expected to reach the Earths surface and cause local disasters or produce the tidal waves that can inundate low lying coastal areas. On an average of every several hundred thousand years or so, asteroids larger than a kilometer could cause global disasters. In this case, the impact debris would spread throughout the Earths atmosphere so that plant life would suffer from acid rain, partial blocking of sunlight, and from the firestorms resulting from heated impact debris raining back down upon the Earths surface. Since their orbital paths often cross that of the Earth, collisions with near-Earth objects have occurred in the past and we should remain alert to the possibility of future close Earth approaches. It seems prudent to mount efforts to discover and study these objects, to characterize their sizes, compositions and structures and to keep an eye upon their future trajectories. [...] No one should be overly concerned about an Earth impact of an asteroid or comet. The threat to any one person from auto accidents, disease, other natural disasters and a variety of other problems is much higher than the threat from NEOs. Over long periods of time, however, the chances of the Earth being impacted are not negligible so that some form of NEO insurance is warranted. At the moment, our best insurance rests with the NEO scientists and their efforts to first find these objects and then track their motions into the future. We need to first find them, then keep an eye on them. NASA is currently tracking about 20,000 NEOs. While these objects routinely pass by Earth without incident, every now and again a media outlet will write an outlandish story about how one of these objects is posed to wipe out life on earth. While we've seen several of these fear-mongering rumors over the years, these "doomsday" asteroids never seem to arrive.  fear-mongering rumors years Kettley, Sebastian.  "Asteroid Warning: NASA Tracks a 4KM Asteroid Approach - Could End Civilisation if it Hits."
  Daily Express.  4 March 2020. Strickland, Ashley.  "Large Asteroid Will Fly by the Earth Next Month, But Won't Hit Us, Reassures NASA."
  CNN.  3 March 2020. In the summer of 2018, the Trump administration's implementation of a "zero tolerance" immigration policy  which saw thousands of children separated from their migrant parents, often in difficult and uncertain circumstances  provoked widespread and often impassioned opposition and public debate. One such discussion around the issue of immigration sparked a wave of outrage after screenshots went viral online which appeared to show an employee of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) calling for immigrants into the United States to be shot at the border.  ODOT In a 19 June 2018 Facebook post, Angela Ochoa shared a screenshot which appeared to show Lori McAllen, an employee of ODOT, writing: post I personally think they should shoot them all at the border and call it good...it'll save us hard working AMERICAN'S [sic] billions of dollars on our taxes!! ;)   The post went viral.  A spokesperson for ODOT confirmed that the agency was "looking into a posting that was connected to ODOT." Without naming McAllen, the spokesperson said the employee had been "put on administrative leave" while ODOT investigates the facts surrounding the post, as well as its authenticity.  "We take this very seriously and very personally," the spokesperson told us, adding that the post "does not reflect the values of ODOT," and that its content was "deeply disturbing and hurtful." We can confirm that McAllen's post is authentic. We spoke to a person with knowledge of the posts and whose identity we were able to verify. That person told us that McAllen made her remarks during the course of a 19 June 2018 Facebook debate involving several people about the ongoing "zero tolerance" immigration policy, and the separation of children from their parents. The conversation was held on the Facebook page of another user.  We also received multiple screenshots from that conversation, which both corroborate the authenticity of McAllen's post, and show excerpts from the exchanges that led up to, and came after, her "shoot them all at the border" comment. We have edited these images only to preserve the anonymity of other participants.    Some time after McAllen posted the comment in question, another participant, outraged at its content, warned that they would make her "famous." In this screenshot, McAllen responds mockingly to a reference to her own offending remarks:    Another screenshot shows a third person, supportive of McAllen, acknowledging the fact that she did indeed post the remarks in question ("ONE comment Lori made") and attacking another participant in the conversation.     Another series of screenshots sent to us clearly shows McAllen responding to further references to her "shoot them at the border" comments.  McAllen has deleted her social media profiles and we were unable to contact her for comment. In April 2020, Facebook posts circulating online offered coupons supposedly good for two free large pizzas from the Domino's pizza chain:  Users who clicked on the offer were taken to an external website where they were instructed to answer survey questions in order to receive their coupons:  After completing the questionnaire, however, users were then required to click a button to share the "offer" with their Facebook friends before they could retrieve their coupons. Those who complied by spamming their friends were then allowed to click a "Receive the Coupon" button, but there was no actual coupon to receive. Like innumerable other "free merchandise" offers on Facebook, this offer was another variation of a common scam. other free merchandise offers Facebook We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud: These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their free gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed: offers consumers Claim:  The viral quote "If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die" was written by Canadian rapper Drake.  Example:  [Collected via Twitter, January 2015]  If a Writer Falls in Love with you, You shall Never Die #ReadSomewhere #ReadSomewhere  Gaonka6hhora (@Gaonka6hhora) February 9, 2015 February 9, 2015  Origins:  In January 2015, Canadian musician Aubrey Drake Graham, better known in his persona as the rapper Drake,incorrectly attributed a viral Tumblr quote about a writer's falling in love to Mustafa the Poet when he posted the meme to his Instagram page:   @mustafathepoet @mustafathepoet A photo posted by champagnepapi (@champagnepapi) on Jan 14, 2015 at 9:11pm PST  Hundreds of thousands of viewers liked the photo, and many who saw the above-displayed Instagram post believed it was written by Drake, while others noticed the musician's attempt to credit the original author and praised Mustafa the Poet for penning the viral phrase.  But the phrase "If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die" was written neither by Drake nor by Mustafa the Poet. The true author is Mik Everett, who first published the quote back in 2011 on her blog:  Mik Everett blog Lots of things might happen. That's the thing about writers. They're unpredictable. They might bring you eggs in bed for breakfast, or they might all but ignore you for days. They might bring you eggs in bed at three in the morning. Or they might wake you up for sex at three in the morning. Or make love at four in the afternoon. They might not sleep at all. Or they might sleep right through the alarm and forget to get you up for work. Or call you home from work to kill a spider. Or refuse to speak to you after finding out you've never seen To Kill a Mockingbird. Or spend the last of the rent money on five kinds of soap. Or sell your textbooks for cash halfway through the semester. Or leave you love notes in your pockets. Or wash you pants with Post-It notes in the pockets so your laundry comes out covered in bits of wet paper. They might cry if the Post-It notes are unread all over your pants. Its an unpredictable life. But what happens if a writer falls in love with you? This is a little more predictable. You will find your hemp necklace with the glass mushroom pendant around the neck of someone at a bus stop in a short story. Your favorite shoes will mysteriously disappear, and show up in a poem. The watch you always wear, the watch you own but never wear, the fact that you've never worn a watch: they suddenly belong to characters you've never known. And yet they're you. They're not you; they're someone else entirely, but they toss their hair like you. They use the same colloquialisms as you. They scratch their nose when they lie like you. Sometimes they will be narrators; sometimes protagonists, sometimes villains. Sometimes they will be nobodies, an unimportant, static prop. This might amuse you at first. Or confuse you. You might be bewildered when books turn into mirrors. You might try to see yourself how your beloved writer sees you when you read a poem about someone who has your middle name or prose about someone who has never seen To Kill a Mockingbird. These poems and novels and short stories, they will scatter into the wind. You will wonder if you're wandering through the pages of some story you've never even read. There's no way to know. And no way to erase it. Even if you leave, a part of you will always be left behind.  If a writer falls in love with you, you can never die. Vibe NY Mag On 23 January 2015, Mik Everett took to her website to express her frustrations with being a virally famous, yet unknown, author. A portion of Everett's article is republished below: website Last Monday, I woke up to something weirder than I could possibly imagine. I woke up to find that Drake had posted a quote by me on Instagram. And that he'd credited the quote to another author. There is no Thought Catalogue article entitled What to Do If a Famous Rapper Steals Your Quote. There is no Buzzfeed article on how to cope with the rabid fans of a rockstar insisting that you've stolen from him. To the best of my knowledge, this isn't a very common problem to have. Sure, I've heard of academic and artistic plagiarism before, usually involving two high-profile, Entertainment News celebrities. But I'm not a celebrity. I've sold, like, two hundred copies of each of my books. I live well below the poverty line. I'm a regular person who said something kinda catchy once on the internet, and lots of people liked it. And Drake liked it. I am so disconnected from that quote and the people who use it; I am simultaneously on the outside looking in on the very idea of fame, and in the very middle of it. To be clear here, nobody broke any laws. Drake did not take credit for the quote. He attempted to cite the quote, like we all learned how to do in middle school. He just cited the wrong poet. That poet (he goes by Mustafa) did give me appropriate credit for the quote, eventually. After Drake had re-posted the quote and attributed it to Mustafa, I think it kinda blew up in his face and people started hounding him to give me credit. And he did add my name in. But on the internet, that doesn't matter. Everyone else is still attributing the quote to Mustafa. And there's no way to fix it. Just try messaging Drake on Instagram. On one hand, it's not that big of a deal. The quote has been used several million times on the internet, and is rarely credited to me. On the other hand, I would really, really, really like to make a living as an author. And in our day and age, there are no more camera-shy Thomas Pynchons. To be a financially successful author is inextricable from being a famous author. We hope this helps Mik Everett garner some of the recognition she deserves.   Last updated:  10 February 2015 In November 2016, rumors began to swirl that the European Union had ordered the media not to report when terrorism suspects were Muslim, presumably because of pressure from Islamic groups.  The stories were mostly fueled like the headlines such as the one reproduced above, which appears to have been taken from an 18 November 2016 post by the Gatestone Institute: post   The institute is headed up by John R. Bolton, a Fox News contributor and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who is reportedly under consideration by President-elect Donald Trump as his secretary of state. reportedly The headline, in turn, was similar to one published by the conservative Daily Mail in Britain on 5 October 2016: the conservative Daily Mail   The allegation is taken from a report published a day earlier by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), which was commissioned by the Council of Europe to monitor human rights abuses. However, Bolton's group failed to note that the council is a separate organization from the European Union, and it issued a recommendation, not a mandate. earlier ECRI Both the Mail and the institute portray the report as pinning the blame on the media for an increase in hate crimes and hate speech across the United Kingdom between 2009 and 2016. As the latter group puts it: The ECRI report establishes a direct causal link between some tough headlines in British tabloids and the security of the Muslims in the UK. In other words, the British press is allegedly inciting readers to commit "Islamophobic" acts against Muslims. Criticism of the report centered around this passage: ECRI regrets that a way has not been found to establish an independent press regulator and that, as a result, certain tabloids continue to publish offensive material, as indicated above. ECRI urges the media to take stock of the importance of responsible reporting, not only to avoid perpetuating prejudice and biased information, but also to avoid harm to targeted persons or vulnerable groups. ECRI considers that, in light of the fact that Muslims are increasingly under the spotlight as a result of recent ISIS-related terrorist acts around the world, fuelling prejudice against Muslims shows a reckless disregard, not only for the dignity of the great majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom, but also for their safety. In this context, it draws attention to a recent study by Teesside University suggesting that where the media stress the Muslim background of perpetrators of terrorist acts, and devote significant coverage to it, the violent backlash against Muslims is likely to be greater than in cases where the perpetrators motivation is downplayed or rejected in favour of alternative explanations. The Teesside study, which covered the period between March 2014 and February 2015, found that instances of anti-Muslim violence in Europe and Australia increased in the seven-day period immediately after terror attacks, compared to the seven days before. However, that report also stated that there were fewer Islamophobic incidents in Australia following the attack on a Sydney shopping mall in December 2014, pointing out that the reporting focused on the attacker's history of mental instability and not his religion. study, attack While the ECRI did call for an "independent press regulator," it also stated that it did not want government officials "encroaching on [media outlets'] editorial independence the need to ensure that reporting does not contribute to creating an atmosphere of hostility and rejection towards various minority ethnic groups." It also said that media practices in the UK had already been criticized in the Leveson Inquiry, a government probe that took place after revelations that News International (owned by Fox News CEO Rupert Murdoch) engaged in phone-hacking and other dubious practices. Inquiry, From the ECRI report: The Leveson Report, published in November 2012, pointed out that certain parts of the press ride roughshod over others, both individuals and the public at large, without any justifiable public interest, and that a significant number of news stories fail to meet standards of integrity and propriety and reflect a culture of recklessness in prioritising sensational stories, almost irrespective of the harm these may cause and the rights of those who would be affected. It also noted a significant and reckless disregard for accuracy. The report stated that the Press Complaints Commission was not independent and had failed its purpose, and recommended replacing it with a new, independent, self-regulatory body established by statute, with the dual roles of promoting high standards of journalism and protecting the rights of individuals, and with a range of sanctions available to it. Bolton's organization also failed to note that the ECRI's report contained 23 recommendations for the U.K. government, covering not only how to deal with Islamophobia, but ways to integrate refugees arriving to England and Northern Ireland, as well as Romani groups. recommendations Mamou, Yves. "Council of Europe Recommends British Press NOT Report when Terrorists are Muslims." Gatestone Institute. 18 November 2016. Conway, Madeline. "Bolton calls regime change the 'only long-term solution' in Iran." Politico. 17 November 2016. Dathan, Matt. "European human rights chiefs order the British press NOT to reveal when terrorists are Muslims in crackdown on freedom of speech." The Daily Mail. 5 October 2016. European Commission against Racism and Intolerance. "ECRI Report on the United Kingdom (Fifth Monitoring Cycle)." Coe.int. 4 October 2016. Teesside University. "New report reveals a rise in anti-Muslim hostility in Britain following acts of terrorism around the world." www.tees.ac.uk. 18 June 2015. Claim:  Crafters have been asked to knit sweaters for oil-soaked penguins.  Example:  [Collected via Facebook, March 2014]    Origins:  When an ocean-going tanker goes down at sea, loosing crude oil into the ocean, the immediate and long-term effects on the environment are often catastrophic. Equally as dangerous is the illegal practice of passing ships' dumping fuel oil into the water rather than properly disposing of it in port. In the case of the "little penguins" (previously known as "fairy penguins")  who live on Phillip Island near Melbourne, Australia, such accidents and illegal activities have threatened the entire population of penguins.  Cleaning the animals by hand with warm water and a mild detergent then returning them to their natural habitat has been found to be an effective means of dealing with the danger posed by oil spills, but there's a snag in the plan: Often the little penguins are far too ill to be bathed right away, and the scrubbing can be quite stressful. One solution proffered several years ago was to slip the oil-coated birds into wool sweaters to prevent them from preening themselves and possibly swallowing toxic petroleum-based oil as they regained needed strength, and to keep them warm until their bodies were once again producing the natural oils (removed by the cleaning) necessary to their insulation. But where would get such penguin attire? Appeals were made to the knitting public to place their time, skill, and leftover yarn into the service of animals in need. A New Year's Day 2000 spill of 260 gallons of fuel oil off the southern tip of Australia prompted an appeal that resulted in piles of sweaters ("jumpers," in Australia) being sent to aid the damaged little birds, many crafted by the capable hands of American knitters. To be better prepared for the next such environmental crisis, in 2001, the Tasmanian Conservation Trust and State Library ran the knit-for-a-penguin campaign. They hoped to build a stockpile of 100 sweaters. They got more than they bargained for. The original result was an oversubscription of this entreaty for aid, with the appeal threatening to escalate into a "Sorcerer's Apprentice" situation. One thousand sweaters were quickly received, with more arriving all the time. The organizers originally wanted to conclude this part of its Oil Spill Response Program, but then rethought that   action, deciding to ask the knitting public for an additional two thousand penguin sweaters. However, despite those good intentions, other wildlife officials have stated in connection with similar efforts that knitting garments for penguins accomplishes little  (other than fulfilling an instinctive human need to help), as penguins don't really benefit from wearing vests and sweaters, and many items crafted for that purpose have simply accumulated in unused piles: Hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of sweaters have been lovingly knitted and donated to help the little blue penguins coated with oil stay warm  but the outfits won't be used. The countless hours spent by people selecting colours, designing patterns and knitting the costumes has only resulted in idle piles of the woollen outfits, unused and unlikely to be used. A Maritime New Zealand spokesman for the oiled wildlife centre in Tauranga said they had received a box of the handmade sweaters and that should be more than enough. "The vets have expressed appreciation [but] they haven't used any," he said. "They haven't been required and I just don't know that they will be used at all." A keeper at Auckland Zoo said the idea of making the little birds wear the jerseys might cause them extra stress. She said the cleaning process strips the birds of their natural oil and can make them cold but the facilities at the centre were set up to cater for this. "They are getting washed and rinsed and then they go into a warmed tent under heat lamps." Miss Clark said she had never seen a vest on a penguin and she wondered how much the birds would appreciate the costuming. "Putting something like that on a penguin, it's probably only going to stress it out even more than they already are. These are wild penguins, they haven't had any interaction with humans. There's already enough stress on a bird without trying to put a sweater on it," she said. Maree Buscke of Skeinz.com, which helped to organise the knitting scrum, said the sweaters were a way for people to help, even if they weren't going to be used. She was still receiving sweaters from knitters, she said, plus turning down more offers to help. The blog of the International Bird Rescue organization similarly states that sweaters "are not considered a useful tool for the rehabilitation of oiled birds, primarily penguins": International Bird Rescue To help the birds stay warm and limit the amount of preening, we only have to do one thing  house birds in a warm, ventilated area. When birds are warm, they reduce their preening because they're comfortable. When they're cold, they're stimulated to preen in an attempt to correct the loss of body heat. Our research and experience over the course of hundreds of spills has shown us that when we keep them warm while they are still oiled, birds do well. There's also another hazard to the sweater concept: Any handling or wearing of anything foreign to them contributes to the penguins' stress. Reducing stress is our biggest challenge in an oil spill. Sweaters can be cumbersome, and require a secure fit to ensure that the bird will not become entangled. When birds are kept in warm rooms without sweaters, their stress is reduced, because they do not need to be monitored or handled. In the Treasure oil spill in 2000 in Cape Town, South Africa, International Bird Rescue worked with the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) and the South African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds (SANCCOB) to rehabilitate over 20,000 oiled African Penguins; we successfully released 95% of them. In every oil spill where we have cared for penguins, International Bird Rescue has had at least an 80% release rate, and none of these birds wore sweaters. Our colleagues from around the world agree that penguin sweaters are adorable and offer an avenue for concerned people to contribute, but they are not considered a useful tool for the rehabilitation of oiled birds, primarily penguins. In 2014 another Internet-circulated call went out for volunteers to knit jumpers for penguins in case of an oil spill emergency, a plea said to have been issued at the behest of the Australia-based Penguin Foundation.  But while that organization notes on its web site they do use penguin pullovers, they "do not urgently require little penguin jumpers for rehabilitation" and they already "have a good supply of these [jumpers]": Penguin Foundation web site We have a good stockpile of jumpers suitable for rehabilitation purposes which we also distribute to other wildlife rescue centres where need be. Little penguin jumpers are also used as an educational tool to teach students and others about the devastating effects marine and coastal pollution has on marine wildlife and the environment.  Please know that we do not urgently require little penguin jumpers for rehabilitation, we have a good supply of these which we use on any rescued oiled penguins and in the event of an oil spill, these jumpers are also sent to other wildlife rescue centres if required. Concerned animal lovers may still offer their time and effort to craft garments for penguins nonetheless, but it's highly unlikely they will ever be worn by any of those birds  instead they'll probably be sold to raise funds for ongoing conservation efforts, and volunteers who want to help might do better to simply donate money directly to wildlife organizations that help protect penguins rather than expending their time and effort at making clothing for those critters: Q. What'll happen if I knit a penguin sweater?  A. Odds are it'll be used to dress a toy, not a real penguin. When charities got inundated with sweaters last time, several started using the extra sweaters as fundraisers  they use them on stuffed toy penguins, and the sales of those benefit the charity. That's what's happening here. The money raised helps wildlife conservation. The Penguin Foundation also uses the sweaters in its educational programs. Q. Bottom line: Should I knit a penguin sweater or not? A. Your call. There's no wrong answer. It's an easy project, it'll definitely help penguins and it's a fun way to introduce children and rookie knitters to the joys of charity knitting. So if you really want to knit a penguin sweater, go to it  but bear in mind that the cost of shipping it/them to Australia won't be cheap, and if you want to help the birds, you might just want to donate funds directly to the Penguin Foundation. Barbara "fashion plated" Mikkelson Additional information:        Caring for Sick and Injured Little Penguins    (Penguin Foundation)    Last updated:  11 February 2015    Brown, Simon Leo.  "Knitters Wanted for Penguin Pullovers."   ABC Melbourne.  6 March 2014.    Frederick, Chuck.  "North Shore Women Knit Sweaters for Birds."   Duluth News Tribune.  7 June 2000.    Mooney, Mary.  "Penguin Sweaters: Separating Fact from Fiction."   The Oregonian.  6 March 2014.    AAP Newsfeed.  "TAS: Penguin Jumper Glut."   17 May 2001.    Associated Press.  "Guild Knits Sweaters for Miniature Penguins."   [Dubuque] Telegraph Herald.  11 April 2000  (p. A1).    The Age.  "Penguins Get Knits."   18 May 2001.    Omaha World-Herald.  "Knitter Helps Save Penguins."   9 February 2001  (p. 17).