Ohios electricity rates are 10 percent below the national average.
Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland seems determined to be regarded as your energy governor. In his race for re-election this November, the governor touts his efforts toward energy reform at almost every opportunity.He was at it again during a campaign address on July 6 when he said, The energy reform bill I proposed gave Ohio one of the nations most aggressive renewable energy policies and has pushed our utilities to innovate.And while other states that failed to act saw electricity rates jump 70 percent, Strickland said, Ohios electricity rates are 10 percent below the national average.Stricklands spokeswoman, Allison Kolodziej, acknowledges that Ohios electricity rates were already well below the national average before Strickland took office in January 2007. But she said the governors push for Senate Bill 221  which became law in 2008 and placed tighter reins on utility companies seeking to set market-based pricing  prevented Ohios rates from skyrocketing as rates did in other states where wholesale market pricing was unchecked.The question: Are Ohios rates today a full 10 percent below the national average as the governor claimed? The governors campaign staff said it relied on information from the U.S. Department of Energys Energy Information Administration, or EIA, for its figures.According to EIAs most recent average retail price report, released June 16 and updated through March, Ohios average electricity price for all sectors this year was 8.72 cents per kilowatt hour. The national average was 9.5 cents. That means Ohios rate thus for 2010 for all sectors is about 8 percent below the national average  not 10 percent.In 2009, however  the last full year of available figures  Ohios average was 8.63 cents per kilowatt hour and the national average 9.75 cents, meaning a year ago the state was 11 percent below the national average. That means Stricklands statement is not accurate today but was a year ago.Kolodziej said the campaign is relying on 2009 figures because the full 2010 year figures are not yet complete.The premise of Stricklands statement is that Ohio is still trending below the national average when it comes to electricity rates, and thus is better off than many other states in terms of utility costs. The context of his point was accurate.But while the full 2010 figures are not yet available, there were more up to date figures the governor could have relied on during his speech that, while not as flattering as 2009, could have still effectively made his point  just more accurately.We rate this statement as Mostly True. Comment on this item.
Claim:  President Bill Clinton issued an executive order disarming soldiers on military bases.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, August 2010]  Is it true that "one of the first things Bill Clinton did in office was to issue an executive order disarming soldiers on military bases"?   Origins:  The wake of the September 2013 fatal shooting of 12 people by a civilian military contractor who went on a rampage at Washington Navy Yard saw the recirculation of a rumor that gained currency after the November 2009 fatal shooting of 13 people by a U.S. Army psychiatrist at  Fort Hood, Texas: that one of the reasons these mass shooters had not been stopped earlier in their killing sprees was because President Bill Clinton had issued an executive order back in 1993 that prohibited personnel on military bases from carrying firearms while on duty. While there was at least a small kernel of real information underlying such claims, the gist of the rumor was wrong on two major counts. It was during the presidency of George H.W. Bush, not Bill Clinton, that the U.S. Department of Defense issued a directive in February 1992 affecting the carrying of firearms on bases by military personnel.  That directive was eventually implemented through a  regulation 190-14 issued by the Department of the Army  (not via executive order) in March 1993, just two months after President Clinton assumed office.   directive regulation Additionally, that change in regulations (which applied only to the Army, not other branches of the U.S. armed forces) did not ban the carrying of weapons by soldiers on Army bases; rather, it restricted the authorization to carry firearms to personnel engaged in law enforcement and security duties, and to personnel stationed at facilities where there was "a reasonable expectation that life or Army assets would be jeopardized if firearms were not carried": a. The authorization to carry firearms will be issued only to qualified personnel when there is a reasonable expectation that life or Department of the Army (DA) assets will be jeopardized if firearms are not carried. Evaluation of the necessity to carry a firearm will be made considering this expectation weighed against the possible consequences of accidental or indiscriminate use of firearms. b. DA personnel regularly engaged in law enforcement or security duties will be armed. c. DA personnel are authorized to carry firearms while engaged in security duties, protecting personnel and vital Government assets, or guarding prisoners. Others noted that the change in policy likely had little actual effect on day-to-day base operations: Steven Bucci, a military expert for The Heritage Foundation who served 28 years in the Army and retired in 2005 with the rank of colonel, also [said] that Clinton is not to blame. "I think you are barking up the wrong tree if you are looking to put blame on someone for disarming the military," said Bucci, when asked if Clinton was responsible. "I think that's kind of a bogus story." "We have never had our soldiers walking around with weapons all the time, other than in combat zones," he added, noting only Military Police have had that authority. Last updated:  16 July 2015 Are Democratic presidents better than Republican presidents at job creation? Former President Bill Clinton said so -- forcefully -- in his speech to the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. Since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats 24, Clinton said. In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private-sector jobs. So what's the jobs score? Republicans 24 million, Democrats 42 (million). In the packed convention hall, it was one of the nights biggest applause lines. In 2010, we checked a similar claim from Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who said that Democratic presidents have been considerably more effective at creating private-sector jobs. After crunching the numbers back to President Harry Truman, we found that jobs did indeed grow faster under Democratic presidents when adjusted for a presidents years served in office. So we rated the claimTrue. Clintons claim at the convention was worded differently, so we quickly re-crunched the numbers based on his specifications. Lets cut to the chase. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, here are the net increases in private-sector employment under each president, chronologically by party: RepublicansRichard Nixon: Increase of 7.1 million jobsGerald Ford: Increase of 1.3 million jobsRonald Reagan: Increase of 14.7 million jobsGeorge H.W. Bush: Increase of 1.5 million jobsGeorge W. Bush: Decline of 646,000 jobsTotal: Increase of 23.9 million jobs under Republican presidentsDemocratsJohn F. Kennedy: Increase of 2.7 million jobsLyndon B. Johnson: Increase of 9.5 million jobsJimmy Carter: Increase of 9.0 million jobsBill Clinton: Increase of 20.8 million jobsBarack Obama: Increase of 332,000 jobs Total: Increase of 42.3 million jobs. So Clinton is right. But well bring up a few points worth noting. This does not include government jobs The combination of private-sector jobs and public-sector jobs is a broader measurement of job creation than private-sector alone. But excluding government jobs would presumably hurt Democrats more than Republicans, given the two parties historical stances toward the role of government. The fact that Democrats finished so far ahead despite taking government jobs off the table makes it a more impressive accomplishment. The Democrats didnt benefit from population growth For our previous story, Brookings Institution economist Gary Burtless calculated that the U.S. working-age population actually grew slightly faster under Republican presidents, also making the Democratic accomplishment more impressive. Presidents deserves less credit for the good times and less blame for the bad times It's a truism of politics that when things go well, the president generally gets too much credit, and when things don't go well, the president usually gets too much blame. Shouldn't the Republican Congress of 1995-2001 get a share of the credit for Clinton's robust job growth? Shouldn't the Democratic House that served under Reagan? Most experts would say yes and yes. Since we published our previous story, we have changed our policy: We now factor into our ratings whether the politician or party deserves credit or blame for the statistical trend being analyzed. In this item, though, we will not factor in credit or blame, because both parties have had presidents serve during the time we looked at, meaning that both parties would have benefited and suffered in roughly equal proportions. Its unclear how much this finding says about our political and economic systems Job creation for each president depended to a certain extent on timing, external factors and luck. And as Yale political scientist David Mayhew pointed out for our previous story, conclusions drawn from a relatively narrow data set -- in this case, just 12 postwar presidencies -- need to be taken with a grain of salt. Our ruling Clintons figures check out, and they also mirror the broader results we came up with two years ago. Partisans are free to interpret these findings as they wish, but on the numbers, Clintons right. We rate his claim True. 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 On April 14, 2010, former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin addressed a tea party event in Boston and tried to characterize the scale of the tax burden in the United States.Americans now spend 100 days out of the year working for government before we even start working for ourselves, she said.By making her point this way, Palin was using a yardstick that receives both attention and criticism every April 15, the day federal tax returns are due. So we thought it would be as good a time as any to look once again at the skirmishing over Tax Freedom Day. (Welast studied the questionmore than two years ago, when Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee cited a similar statistic.) Tax Freedom Day is the date when Americans . . . have earned enough money to pay this year's tax obligations at the federal, state and local levels, according to the Tax Foundation, the Washington, D.C.-based group that has calculated it for decades and also determined it retroactively back to 1900.The foundation calculates Tax Freedom Day by taking the amount of tax revenue collected and dividing it by national income created, producing an average tax burden for the U.S. economy as a whole. That percentage is then multiplied by 365 to calculate the number of days over the course of a year it would take to pay off the entire tax burden. (The calculation counts every day of the year, not adjusting for weekends, holidays or leap years. )To determine tax revenue, the foundation adds together individual income taxes paid at every governmental level; payroll taxes, the federal levies that fund Social Security and Medicare; sales and excise taxes, which are typically collected at the state and local level; corporate income taxes; property taxes; and other miscellaneous taxes such as those for car licenses, energy or mineral production and estates.The Tax Foundation also offers state-specific Tax Freedom Days. These range from 85 for Alaska (Palin's home state) and Louisiana to 117 for higher-tax Connecticut. But the national average is 99.So if we measure Palin by how closely her figure tracks with the current Tax Freedom Day statistic, she scores well. She rounded up from 99 to 100 -- close enough in our book -- and she used the national average rather than any state figure, which is appropriate.Still, before giving Palin the Truth-O-Meter seal of approval, we need to determine whether she described the number's meaning accurately. And this requires delving into the annual debate over how useful the Tax Freedom Day concept is.The Tax Foundation's loyal antagonist in this annual battle is the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. CBPP doesn't suggest that Tax Freedom Day is a bad statistic; it acknowledges that it's a perfectly fine tool if you need to compare the level of taxation in different countries, or measure how the tax burden has changed over time.However, CBPP does cite a number of complaints. We're ignoring a bunch that aren't addressed by Palin's comment, such as concerns over how the state-by-state tax burdens are calculated.The one criticism by CBPP that we do think is relevant to Palin's comment is the argument that Tax Freedom Day ignores differences in how much Americans of different income levels pay in taxes.The Tax Foundation's number represents an average tax burden for the economy as a whole. But CBPP argues that the foundation's number is not a good measure of what a typical taxpayer pays. To explain the difference, CBPP offers the following example:Suppose four families with incomes of $50,000 each pay $2,500 in taxes  5 percent of their income  while one wealthy family with income of $300,000 pays $90,000 in taxes  30 percent of its income. Total income among these five families is $500,000, and the total amount paid in taxes is $100,000. Thus, 20 percent of the total income of the five families goes to pay taxes. But the 20 percent figure is highly misleading as an indicator of the typical tax burden for families in this group, since four of the five families have tax rates just one-fourth of that amount.This is obviously an extreme case, and William Ahern, the Tax Foundation's director of policy and communications, countered that in the real world of taxation, the differences between taking a strict average (as the Tax Foundation does) and using a median figure (which would more closely reflect patterns of income distribution) aren't that great. CBPP cites research showing that the difference is significant.CBPP argues that there's enough income inequality in the United States, and enough progressivity in the tax code, to undermine the usefulness of Tax Freedom Day calculations. That's because a sizable majority of taxpayers must work significantly fewer days to pay off their tax bill -- and a minority must work significantly more days. So any attempt to suggest that Tax Freedom Day represents the experience of a typical American -- as opposed to one on the higher end of the income spectrum -- may be problematic.The good news for the Truth-O-Meter is that we don't have to resolve this dispute in order to rate Palin's comment -- we only need to make sure that Palin described accurately the statistic she was using. The bad news in this particular case is that Palin's phrasing is a bit elliptical, making it difficult to parse her words. Palin said, Americans now spend 100 days out of the year working for government before we even start working for ourselves. That's pretty close to what the Tax Foundation said in its own release -- Americans will work well over three months of the year  from Jan. 1 to April 9  before they have earned enough money to pay this year's tax obligations at the federal, state and local levels. Both Palin and the Tax Foundation avoid saying that Tax Freedom Day represents the experience of a typical American, which would have been a more problematic phrasing. Our graduated tax system, which is weighted more heavily on the wealthy, means that the average amount paid is skewed upward by a smaller number of wealthy people who pay a lot. In other words, there are many, many more people who would fall under the 100-day threshold mentioned by Palin than over it. We think listeners take Palin as referring to what a typical American pays in taxes, since she didn't specify otherwise. Leaving that impression in listeners' minds, we knock her statement down to Mostly True. On 31 May 2014, three 12-year-old girls embarked on a "birdwatching" expedition in a wooded area near their homes in Waukesha, Wisconsin that ended in one of them being stabbed 19 times and left for dead. Seriously injured, the victim managed to crawl to a nearby road, where she was found and taken to a hospital. She told police her friends had attacked her. The other two girls were arrested and charged with attempted first-degree intentional homicide. The attack weapon was found among their belongings. They admitted to planning and executing the crime. Under interrogation, they claimed they did it to appease a supernatural being called Slenderman (aka Slender Man), who was described in a Newsweek article as "an evil character who lives only on the Internet," but in whom the accused attackers said they fervently believed: described According to the criminal complaint obtained by Newsweek, Morgan Geyser and Anissa Weier, both 12, discovered Slender Man on Creepypasta Wiki, a website dedicated to Internet horror stories (its tagline: Proudly hosting 12,151 of your worst nightmares since 2010). They believed he was real. In early 2014, Geyser and Weier decided to become what they called proxies of Slender Man, thereby proving their dedication to him and his existence to skeptics. To do so, theyd have to kill someone. Creepypasta Wiki Although months in the planning, their mission did not succeed. The victim, Payton Leutner, recovered, though she still lives in fear for her life, her mother says. The accused were tried as adults and pleaded guilty to the attack but argued in court they weren't responsible for their actions due to mental illness. In December 2017, Weier was sentenced to 25 years in a psychiatric institution. Geyser has yet to face sentencing. The incident was cast as a cautionary tale for parents by Waukesha police chief Russell Jack, who cited it as a consequence of allowing children unsupervised access to the Internet: cited Keeping children safe is more challenging than in years past. The Internet has changed the way we live. It is full of information and wonderful sites that teach and entertain. The Internet can also be full of dark and wicked things. But although it's true there are "dark and wicked things" to be found on the Internet (as in life, generally), and children's use of the Internet ought indeed to be supervised, to suggest that the Slenderman materials viewed by the accused are "wicked," in any deeper sense than, say, a Stephen King novel is "wicked," is to misunderstand them. The Slenderman "mythos," as the accumulated stories, images, and commentary related to the character have come to be called, is a blend of fiction and folklore. It's a crowd-sourced horror story that hearkens back to boogeyman tales of old. boogeyman The first time the name "Slender Man" appeared anywhere in print or on screen was on the entertainment web site SomethingAwful.com on 10 June 2009. Someone started a thread in a discussion forum, essentially a Photoshop contest, entitled "Create Paranormal Images." Among the early entries was one posted under the pseudonym "Victor Surge" (later identified as member Eric Knudsen), consisting of an old photograph manipulated to depict a tall, faceless human-like figure with tentacle-like arms lurking in the shadows near a children's playground: SomethingAwful.com One of two recovered photographs from the Stirling City Library blaze. Notable for being taken the day which fourteen children vanished and for what is referred to as "The Slender Man". Deformities cited as film defects by officials. Fire at library occurred one week later. Actual photograph confiscated as evidence.  1986, photographer: Mary Thomas, missing since June 13th, 1986. The effect was understated, yet creepy. Inspired by the example, others contributed photos and backstory expanding on Surge's themes, and piecemeal construction of the Slenderman mythos, a collaborative project from the start, was underway. As Surge himself suggested, it was also, from the start, a patchwork of cultural influences: Where did you get the source for Slender Man? Or was he done from a scratch? The Slender Man as an idea was made-up off the top of my head, although the concept is based on a number of things that scare me. The name I thought up on the fly when I wrote that first bit. The asset I used for a couple of the pictures was the creepy tall guy from Phantasm, which sadly I have not seen, and the others various guys in suits. All of the things that aren't the torso and legs, like the tentacles and Slender Man's face, were painted from scratch however. By the time middle-schoolers Morgan Geyser and Anissa Weier encountered the Slenderman character years later, the mythos had grown considerably and was being archived on fan sites like Creepypasta Wiki (creepypasta" being an Internet slang term for user-created horror stories and images). It's where, for example, the girls would have read that Slenderman uses fear to control people's minds, and then kills them: Creepypasta Wiki He is described as wearing a black suit strikingly similar to the visage of the notorious Men In Black, and as the name suggests, appears very thin and able to stretch his limbs and torso to inhuman lengths in order to induce fear and ensnare his prey. Once his arms are outstretched, his victims are put into something of a hypnotized state, where they are utterly helpless to stop themselves from walking into them. He is also able to create tendrils from his fingers and back that he uses to walk on in a similar fashion to Doctor Octopus. The superhuman stretching ability could also be seen as a similarity between himself and Mr. Fantastic. Whether he absorbs, kills, or merely takes his victims to an undisclosed location or dimension is also unknown as there are never any bodies or evidence left behind in his wake to deduce a definite conclusion. It's also where they would have learned what a Slenderman "proxy" is: proxy Proxy (plural: Proxies) is the term given to those who serve The Slender Man. The theory behind the name is that Proxies are entities or people who are under the influence or control of the Slender Man (or the same force that influences Slender Man), and act based on its wants and needs  hence, Proxies serve as an in-between (i.e. a proxy) for Slender Man. And it's where they would have been introduced to "evidence" that Slenderman sightings date back to the 16th-century in Germany, where woodcuts documenting reports of a murderous so-called "Tall Man" (Der Gromann) with a spear-like arm and superfluous legs were allegedly found:  Der Grossman  According to legend, he was a fairy who lived in the Black Forest. Bad children who crept into the woods at night would be relentlessly chased by Der Gromann, who wouldn't leave them be until he either caught them or they were forced to tell their parents of their wrongdoing. Like other items purporting to constitute visual proof of Slenderman's existence, however, the woodcut is merely a doctored version of a Hans Holbein print (circa 1497, below right) depicting a knight in armor "pierced by Death's lance": print   It's hard not to admire the creativity that went into Slenderman. It's equally hard  at least, from our point of view  to subscribe to the view that it was done for a malevolent purpose or represents a "dark and wicked" side of the Internet. It's more accurate to characterize it as an ad hoc communal art project, or, if you're a folklorist and your bailiwick includes studying the spontaneous generation of stories, an updated, Internet-savvy instance of the age-old process of legend creation. American folklorist Andrea Kitta expressed just this view in a January 2017 interview with the web site inews.co.uk: inews.co.uk The internet is certainly helping to spread modern urban myths wider and faster than before. Kitta argues, however, that they are more or less exactly like traditional folklore. The only difference in some cases is that people may include a picture with the story, which adds to its believability. But all of these forms of folklore share many similarities. They tend to be set in the local or historic past, they are believable, and they contain variation. Folklorists see such tales as imbued with deeper social meanings. Shira Chess, author of Folklore, Horror Stories and the Slender Man (2014), explored these in comments to The Washington Post: We tell ourselves stories because we (humans) are storytelling animals, she wrote in an e-mail. And, to that end, horror stories take on a specific significance and importance because they function metaphorically  the horror stories that are the best are often metaphors for other issues that affect our lives on both cultural and personal levels. Slender Man, Chess says, is a metaphor for helplessness, power differentials, and anonymous forces. Hes an infinitely morphable stand-in for things we can neither understand nor control, universal fears that can drive people to great lengths  even, it would appear, very scary, cold-blooded lengths. Chess seems to be saying it's the feeling of helplessness and fear underlying them, not horror stories themselves, that can drive people to "cold-blooded lengths." Andrea Kitta isn't so sure: Kitta believes that urban legends are sometimes wrongly blamed for shocking events. However, she also suggests it is possible they can exert an influence too. Sometimes people use folklore as a scapegoat, perhaps most famously in the Satanic Panic of the 1980s. But we would be remiss to assume that folklore is safe or benign. We're not in a position to judge to what extent, if any, the Slenderman materials viewed by Payton Leutner's accused attackers may have "exerted an influence" on their behavior. We would point out, however, that reports of such incidents have been very few and far between since the character was created in 2009. Perhaps, as Kitta says, folklore isn't always benign, but we should be wary when it's blamed for the bad things people do. Butler, Mark."Slender Man: How a Modern Urban Legend Came to Haunt a Generation."
inews.co.uk.17 January 2017. Dewey, Caitlin."The Complete History of 'Slender Man,' the Meme That Compelled Two Girls to Stab a Friend."
The Washington Post.27 July 2016. Jones, Abigail."The Girls Who Tried to Kill for Slender Man."
Newsweek.13 August 2014. Vielmetti, Bruce."Girl Believed She Had to Kill  or Be Killed by Slender Man, Attorney Says."
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.16 February 2015. Associated Press. "Girl Gets 25 Years in Mental Hospital in Slender Man Case."
22 December 2017. Creepypasta Wiki."The Slender Man." On 14 December 2016, misleading reports appeared that not one high schoolmarching band in Washington, D.C. would participate in Donald Trump's inauguration: Donald Trump is so unpopular that not even high school marching bands want the opportunity to perform at his inauguration. Although this is typically an honor for any band asked to participate, there is nothing typical  or honorable  about Trump being named president-elect. The Facebook group "American News X" distorted the truth even further when they published a meme stating that "not one high school marching band" was willing to perform at the inauguration: American News X   High school marching bands, both inside and outside of Washington D.C., have not "boycotted" Donald Trump's inauguration. The rumor isa sensationalized and exaggerated version of a genuine news reportpublished by NBC Washington'sAndrea Swalec, whichstated that interest in playing the 2016inauguration appearedlower than normal, and that bands in the D.C. area did not apply to participate: report At least one D.C. public school marching band has participated in the past five inaugural parades, but none applied for consideration this year. Ballou High Schools Majestic Marching Knights performed Destinys Childs Lose My Breath at George W. Bushs second inaugural parade in 2005, and stepped along Pennsylvania Avenue as they played James Browns I Got You (I Feel Good) at Barack Obamas second inaugural parade eight years later. But the beloved band decided to take a break in January and not apply to play in the inaugural parade after several other recent performances, the principal said. Dunbar High Schools band marched in Obamas first inauguration in 2009 but the school will sit this one out because they are rebuilding the band, the principal said. Eastern High School also chose not to participate, the principal said, without elaborating. A D.C. Public Schools spokeswoman said she was not aware of any band in the district that had applied to participate in President-elect Donald Trumps inaugural parade Jan. 20. However, that is not the same as an organized boycott. While it is true that high school bands in the D.C. area did not apply to play Trump's inauguration, theschools cited a variety of reasons to miss the event (a boycott not being one of them). Furthermore, the area's involvement in the last five inaugurations may speak to the lack of interest this year: But politics may not explain the low interest in the inaugural parade; an unwritten rule of the band world may play into why some bands didnt apply. University of Maryland band director Eli Osterloh said that after performing in an inaugural parade, some bands opt to wait about 10 years before applying again, as a courtesy to other applicants. None of this means that the event will be missing a marching band. Drum Corps International events director Sue Kuehnhold said that bands from the president's hometown could be selected to play at the 20 January 2017 inauguration. Swalec, Andrea.  "DC-Area Marching Bands Opt to Sit Out Trump's Inaugural Parade."
  NBC Washington.  14 December 2016. On 19 May 2016 a Facebook user published a photograph and status update reporting that outlets of the Sonic Drive-In fast food chain were selling red tray keychains for $2 that entitled bearers to 99 Route 44 beverages for life: photograph  As is often the case with such high-value discount offers, the photograph rapidly spread outside the user's area and soon flooded Facebook nationally  with some viewers expressing skepticism about the information:  Posters to Sonic's Facebook wall regularly asked whether the claim promotion was real and why they had been unable to obtain the red tray keychain at their local Sonic outlets. Sonic corporate didn't respond to those questions, but an individual Sonic franchise operator replied to a customer's query to say: wall  According to that Sonic operator, the promotion was offered only by a small group of Sonic franchises in Texas. A manager at one of those "red tray" locations told us that the red tray keychains were only available at Texas Sonic locations in Tyler and Longview.  Similarly, 2017 saw the red tray promotion pop up at scattered Sonic Drive-In locations such as Princeton, West Virginia:  The Sonic promotion rumor and social media interest in it has spread confusion similar to that prompted by Wendy's Frosty key chains promotion, which costs $1 and enables purchasers to obtain one free Junior Frosty per Wendy's visit (but are good only for one year from date of purchase). Frosty key chains On Aug. 23, 2020, bystanders' cellphone videos captured a white police officer in Kenosha, Wisconsin, shooting a Black man, Jacob Blake, multiple times as he opened the door to his vehicle. The footage went viral on social media and sparked deadly protests in the lakeside city over racism in American policing. Jacob Blake deadly protests One video, which a neighbor recorded from a second-story apartment nearby, showed Blake, 29, trying to get into his SUV from the driver-side door as a police officer pointed a gun at him, grabbed him by his shirt and then fired several times  shooting Blake in the back. Another clip documented the scene from the ground level, as children and other witnesses watched from a yard. The officer who fired his weapon was identified as Rusten Sheskey, according to Wisconsin's attorney general. video clip identified The day after the shooting, which left Blake paralyzed from the waist down as of this writing, advocates for police reform argued that if those witnesses had not taken out their phones, the public would not have known about the officers' use of potentially-lethal force. It was unclear whether dashboard cameras on squad cars captured the incident, and Kenosha officers do not wear body cameras  leading tools for holding officers accountable for their actions. paralyzed Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who is representing Blake's family, as well as other high-profile cases alleging wrongful use of force by police against Black Americans, including the relatives of George Floyd, tweeted: representing George Floyd,  We considered his underlying claim to be this: Kenosha city leaders approved an "ordinance" in 2017 that "required" all of Kenosha's roughly 200 police officers to wear body cameras, but, despite that active policy, the city had not purchased the technology as of August 2020. Additionally, the lawyer alleged the city was planning to buy the devices in 2022. First, to find any evidence of a 2017 policy that would make body cameras mandatory for all officers, Snopes combed through meeting agendas and minutes for the Kenosha Common Council  the city's 17-member group with the authority to write legislation for the city of roughly 100,000 people between Milwaukee and Chicago. We found an archived video of a council committee meeting on Feb. 27, 2017, where former Alderperson Kevin Mathewson asked the group to approve a formal request for the mayor to set aside city funding in the following year's budget to outfit officers with body cameras. "The city, unfortunately, has been a little slow to implement much technology," he said in his testimony. "If we can help document incidents better, and give the [district attorney] tools to make quicker convictions with less resources, we can save cops from violence ... I think it's a great thing." Roughly one month later, on March 20, 2017, the council unanimously approved the below-displayed resolution  not an ordinance and not Mathewson's budget proposal  that formalized city leaders' support for the devices. But that move was largely a statement to urge state legislators and then-Gov. Scott Walker to establish guidelines for how local police departments store and release the cameras' data, not an enforceable policy to make the devices mandatory for Kenosha officers. approved    Notably, the resolution stated: [I]mplementation of Body Worn Cameras for officers of the Kenosha Police Department is dependent on resolution of policy concerns associated with matters such as usage, storage, requirements, Public Record limitation, and privacy issues involving Body Worn Cameras.  In other words, it was true to state Kenosha city leaders expressed support for equipping police officers with body cameras in 2017, but they did not mandate the technology. Rather, its adoption hinged on if or when the state passed an all-encompassing law governing the devices, per the resolution. (In February 2020, Gov. Tony Evers passed a law outlining body camera regulations for police agencies.) passed A note on semantics here: According to the city of Kenosha's Code of General Ordinances, the council adopts both ordinances and resolutions with its legislative authority, though the latter are temporary in nature and often used for establishing fees and permits, while the former are municipal laws. Calling the March 2017 measure about body cameras an ordinance, like the claim alleged, was incorrect; it did not create an enforceable policy. Code of General Ordinances Next, we searched for any proof to confirm or deny another aspect of the claim: that the city had not purchased the devices as of August 2020. We learned that was true. A February 2020 story by Kenosha News said neither the city police department nor the Kenosha county Sheriff's Department used body-worn cameras. And the day after Blake's shooting, on Aug. 24, Kenosha Mayor John Antaramian confirmed to reporters that the city had not yet purchased the technology but had plans to do so. story confirmed Lastly, we looked for documentation of those efforts that would tell us if the city was indeed preparing to spend the money in 2022 and then deploy the cameras after that. For that step, Snopes reviewed the city's 2020 operating budget, which included a four-year plan for spending on police department projects. That 445-page document included the below-displayed table and confirmed that the city was indeed preparing to spend $200,000 on police body cameras in 2022. 445-page document  Rocco LaMacchia, chairman of the councils public safety committee, told The Associated Press the city initially planned to buy the devices in 2020, but funding shortfalls and technological concerns prompted the city to delay the purchase for two years. We have moved it back so many times, he said in the Aug. 25, 2020, story. I got a feeling this is going to move up on the ladder really fast because of whats going on around the United States right now." The Associated Press In sum, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth and falsehood. It was accurate to claim Kenosha leaders unanimously endorsed the use of body cameras in 2017, though it was false to say they created an enforceable policy, or an ordinance, to require all police officers to wear the devices. Additionally, it was true to assert the city had not bought the devices as of August 2020 and was planning to make the purchase in 2022. Mathewson, Kevin.  "Urge The Mayor To Include Funding For Police Body Worn Cameras (BWC) In The 2018 CIP."
  City of Kenosha.  Accessed 26 August 2020. Wisconsin State Legislature.  "Senate Bill 50."
  Accessed 26 August 2020. Police Department.  "2020-2024 Capital Improvement Plan."
  Accessed 26 August 2020. Zampanti, Jeffrey.  "Body Cameras Gaining Popularity Despite Challenges."
  Kenosha News.  29 February 2020. Foley, Ryan.  "Kenosha Delayed Body Cameras For Years Before Black Shooting."
 The Associated Press.  25 August 2020. Kenosha News.  "In Photos: County Board Committees Consider Body Cams For Sheriff's Department."
  17 July 2020. Kenosha News. "Body Camera Funds Shouldn't Go By The Wayside."
  27 March 2020. Jones, Meg and Joe Taschler. "Less Than 3 Minutes Passed Between When Kenosha Police Arrived And When Jacob Blake Was Shot, According To Dispatch Audio."
  Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 25 August 2020. Bosman, Julie, and Sarah Mervosh.  "Wisconsin Reels After Police Shooting And Second Night of Protests."
 The New York Times.  24 August 2020. In December 2014, a number of Facebook pages using car brand names such as Audi, Range Rover, Mercedes, and Camaro (among others) posted directives similar to the messages quoted above. The pages claimed that Facebook was giving away cars. Among the cars offered in the giveaways were Audi R8s, Range Rovers, Mercedes-Benz E63 AMGs, and Chevrolet Camaro SS models. Almost all the scams followed the same format: they instructed users to like a separate page, like the original post, and share the post on their own Timeline (thereby validating its legitimacy and enticing others to do the same).users were eligible to win one of two available vehicles in the winner's choice of color simply by liking a separate Facebook page, liking and sharing a post, and waiting for an inbox message confirming the winners. In April 2016, the scam reappeared, this time with a Range Rover as the car offered in the giveaway:    The first clue the giveaways following this format were not on the up-and-up was the pages to which Facebook users were directed, pages that had been created just days before the giveaway posts begin to appear. Not only were the secondary Facebook pages involved always new, they were also not linked with car companies or other interests one might imagine could reasonably be expected to offer up a car in exchange for social media advertising (such as automobile dealerships, insurance companies, or large retailers). Were a legitimate company to engage in such a high-ticket contest giveaway, the incentive would be exposure; however, no corresponding promotional return on advertising investment was discernable in these Facebook giveaway claims. The tactics were similar to recent scams involving Costco, Kroger and Amazon gift cards, but the six-figure price tag attached to some of the vehicles involved in the Facebook car giveaway posts proved a far more difficult-to-resist enticement for some users, not all of whom questioned whether sharing a page presented any negative consequence should it later turn out to be a prank, hoax, or other false promise. Costco Kroger Amazon The pages to which users were directed carried all the hallmarks of "like farming" operations intended to quickly build and sell popular Facebook pages. Even if the page creators' intent were only to build an audience, users' participating in the scam created a larger incentive for employing future fakery of the same description to crowd Facebook feeds. Scammers could also exploit a large audience by mining varying levels of personal data from those who have liked a page of dubious origin. So Facebook users who participate in such fake giveaways not only unwittingly help spammers pollute the social network with scams, they may also risk being exposed to malware, clickjacking, or other unpleasantries (such as finding their names and identities endorsing a scam, hate page, or other undesirable activity). Giveaways, particularly of high-value merchandise, are generally rare and almost always conducted through brands' official channels or the social media accounts of related large companies. Claim:  Target stores with optical departments are offering free eyeglasses to children 12 and under. WAS PARTLY Example:  [Collected via e-mail, April 2009] PLEASE PASS ON! THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASSIST THOSE IN OUR COMMUNITIESWHO WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REPAIR OR PURCHASE GLASSES FOR CHILDREN. In case you have a child or know of someone who does (ages 12 and under),they can get a FREE pair of eyeglasses from Target: Target is doing a special promotion for their optical service. It couldend any time but will definitely end no later than April 29th. Children12 and under can get a free pair of glasses. They need to bring in a validprescription for glasses from their doctor and Target will let the childpick from about 40 different frames. They will place their best lenses inthe frames which are non-glare and scratch resistant and normally sell for$200.00. There are no income guidelines. Any child 12 or under iseligible. You can find stores with optical departments at www.target.com to confirmthey are participating before making a trip to their store. Please pass this information on to anyone who can benefit from thispromotional offer. If you know someone with lost or broken glasses pleaseshare this information with them ASAP, as the promotion could end at anytime.They would like families to come in as soon as they can. Origins:  Unfortunately, during troubled economic times ordinary (i.e., non-urgent) health care is one of the first things many families have to eliminate from their budgets  not just routine doctor visits, but also regular dental and optical checkups may go by the wayside, especially among families who have no insurance to cover such services. The claim that Target stores with optical departments are offering free eyeglasses (frames and lenses) to children 12 and under would therefore seem to be a  welcome announcement to many parents: It would mean they could get their children's existing eyeglasses replaced for free, and even if they had to pay for optical exams to obtain new or updated eye prescriptions for their children, they could rest assured that those prescriptions would be filled free at Target for children 12 and under. Sounds too good to be true?  That's what we thought, especially when we noted that the Optical section of Target's web site makes no mention of any such promotion. (They merely offer coupons for discounts on glasses, contacts, and premium lenses.)   Optical coupons So, we contacted Target's Customer Relations department to ask about this promotion and were told that they were offering such a deal, but only in a very limited sense.  The "free eyeglasses to children 12 and under" promotion was a pilot program currently available only in a few stores in select areas (e.g., Kansas City, Kansas).  However, that pilot program has now ended, as a Target Optical marketing manager communicated to us on 10 April 2009: Free Kids Eyeglasses Promotion At Target Optical, we believe strongly in our value, product and services and wanted to introduce Target Shoppers to the unique shopping experiencethat we offer.  So, to introduce more Target Shoppers to our stores, during the month of March we offered families a way to try Target Opticalfor free through our Free Kids Eyeglasses promotion. The Free Kids Eyeglasses promotion is now over.  It was a limited time offer in seven stores within the greater Kansas City area. We were pleasedto distribute over 1,000 pairs of free children's eyeglasses during this event. Last updated:  10 April 2009