Betty White on 'Grow Some Balls'
A popular meme circulating since 2011 via the Internet quotes nonagenarian comic actress Betty White thusly:  But while the observation has much of the cadence, attitude and wit that have made White so beloved by American audiences over the years, she never uttered those words and made no bones about it when they were recited to her by a writer for The Guardian: "That's what I hate about Facebook and the internet. They can say you said anything. I never would have said that. I'd never say that in a million years." The Guardian So, who did say it? Partial credit goes to New York standup comedian Sheng Wang, who delivered a lengthier version of the joke on the 28 January 2011 episode of Comedy Central Presents: Sheng Wang Comedy Central Presents A friend said to me, "Hey you need to grow a pair. Grow a pair, Bro." It's when someone calls you weak, but they associate it with a lack of testicles. Which is weird, because testicles are the most sensitive things in the world. If you suddenly just grew a pair, you'd be a lot more vulnerable. If you want to be tough, you should lose a pair. If you want to be real tough, you should grow a vagina. Those things can take a pounding. And it appears that Wang's routine borrowed heavily from a bit by comedian Hal Sparks, "Pussy Is Tougher," which aired on Showtime in 2010. Pussy Is Tougher Cragg, Michael."Betty White: TV's Golden Girl on 63 Years in Show Business."
The Guardian.9 November 2012.
Claim:  The IOC has announced 3-on-3 basketball will be an official sport at the 2016 Olympics.   Example:  [Collected via Twitter, January 2015]  The 2016 Olympics will feature 3-on-3 basketball. Who would you chose? pic.twitter.com/4VZhxLLy2i pic.twitter.com/4VZhxLLy2i  BALL UP NBA (@BallUpNBA) January 15, 2015 January 15, 2015  Origins:  On 14 January 2015, the satirical Australian web site Betoota Advocate published a fake news article claiming 3-on-3 basketball would be an officially sanctioned sport at the 2016 Summer Olympics: published After decades of pressure and debate, as well as an official application submitted by the International Basketball Federation, the IOC have this week confirmed that a three-men-a-side basketball variant will be included as a part of the official event program for the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro. The final decision was made quietly during an annual committee meeting late last month. After nearly a decade of exploring different options, the International Olympic Committees executive board have confirmed that they will to go ahead with the proposal despite the fact that the request would result in a higher number of athletes and increased number of medals, thereby adding to the cost and complexity of the Games. While the Betoota Advocate's article was shared only a few hundred times on social media, the rumor about 3-on-3 basketball's becoming an official Olympic sport received a viral push when Deadspin reported the hoax as real news: reported The IOC has officially added a new half-court 3-on-3 basketball event to the competitions to be held in the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro. This rules. Right away, you'll have to throw a big bucket of calm down on your head because, as the IOC put it in a 2012 letter discussing its interest in 3-on-3, a large part of the impetus is to focus more on the amateurism of sports and get the event away from being "somewhat of an exhibition for the American NBA." When reporter Kyle Wagner realized his mistake, he added an update at the top of the article stating he had been duped by a satire site: Nah, this isn't happening. I wrote a post based on a satire website, which is just about the dumbest way to f*ck up. Sorry. F*ck me. Woulda been cool though.   Last updated:  16 January 2015 In late 2019, readers asked us about blog posts that were widely shared on social media and falsely claimed that the reality television star Duane Chapman, known as "Dog the Bounty Hunter," had died either by suicide or from a pulmonary embolism.  Those reports were false. Beginning on Nov. 20, admirers of Chapman and his late wife, Beth, who died in June after herself being the subject of death hoaxes, began posting tributes to him and sharing one of two blog posts.  hoaxes The first purported to be hosted by a website with the domain name whatnow.actual-events.com, but when internet users clicked on the story on social media, they were redirected to the domain newspanel.suzeraincollections.com. There, the story carried the headline "Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Pulmonary Embolism. He Didn't Survive His Second Attack. He Was 66 -- WGN."  first   The highly dubious website falsely attributed the claim about Chapman's death to WGN America, a real U.S. television network that broadcast the Chapmans' most recent reality show "Dog's Most Wanted." The hoax article also misleadingly used WGN America's logo in a sharebait video that purported to be a television news report about Chapman's death, but that paused after a few seconds and required users to share the article on social media in order to continue watching:   In reality, WGN America had no connection to the story and did not report on Chapman's death in November 2019, because Chapman did not die in November 2019. The specific claim that Chapman had died from a pulmonary embolism (a blocked artery in the lungs) was rather insidious. At first glance, it appeared especially plausible to many fans of the television star because he was in fact diagnosed with that very problem in September 2019. diagnosed The second blog post shared by social media users was even more distasteful than the first. It falsely and misleadingly used the logo of BBC News, a highly reputable and widely trusted information source, to report that Chapman had taken his own life.  In this instance, social media users shared an article that appeared to be hosted on the domain bbc-newsroom.actualeventstv.com, but which redirected to news-room.easystepsdiy.info. On social media, the post carried the headline "Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News" but when users redirected to the source, the article's headline proclaimed: shared proclaimed "Breaking: (Actual Suicide Video) Duane 'Dog' Chapman Died of Suicide After Depression Attack on His Sickness -- BBC News." Despite the extremely distasteful claim that the video in the article contained footage of Chapman's suicide, it contained nothing of the sort and, just as in the first article, the video stopped after a second or two and required viewers to share the post on social media in order to continue watching.     The claim that Chapman had taken his own life was, like the claim he had died of a pulmonary embolism, particularly insidious. In the season finale of "Dog's Most Wanted," broadcast by WGN America on Nov. 6, Chapman spoke about the recent death of his wife from cancer, and the considerable difficulty he was experiencing in coping with her loss.  At one moment in the episode, he reportedly discussed how he had contemplated taking his own life, such was his grief. People magazine quoted Chapman as saying: People "I just hope that I dont live very much longer without her, because now she made the first step, shes through the gate," he added. She paved a way for me. I want to take a [god damn] pain pill so bad. I feel like if I did something to myself right now and passed away suicidal and I got to heaven and was like, Hi honey, and would she go, You [dumb ass], why would you do that? Or would she go, Wow, youre here. Ill be like Of course Im here. You left me. Im here. So, am I obligated to do that?  Because of that widely reported revelation, a report that Chapman had died by suicide would have appeared somewhat plausible to many readers.  The dubious nature of the websites involved, and the absence of any corroborating evidence or reports by actual news organizations, meant that some readers would have immediately recognized the stories as hoaxes. However, a significant number were taken in by them, and shared them on social media, to the extent that Chapman himself intervened. He provided the gossip website TMZ a photograph of himself holding the Nov. 19 edition of the Denver Post, and a handwritten sign that read "I'm alive!" Chapman then posted a screenshot of that article to his own Instagram page the next day. photograph Instagram If you need help, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-8255. Or contact Crisis Text Line by texting HOME to 741741. Kasprak, Alex. "Outdated: Beth Chapman Death Hoax."
 Snopes.com. 22 April 2019. Lee, Ashley. "Dog the Bounty Hunter Reveals Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis."
 The Los Angeles Times. 28 September 2019. Dugan, Christina. "Dog the Bounty Hunter Contemplates Suicide After Wife Beth's Death on 'Dog's Most Wanted' Finale."
 People. 6 November 2019. TMZ. "Dog the Bounty Hunter: Nope, He's Not Dead...Look, I'm Alive!"
 20 November 2019. In late December 2023, a video was circulated on Reddit, alleging "the ribbon worm, one of the most outlandish creatures we've ever discovered, spits a living, tree-like proboscis to hunt it's prey." was circulated   (Reddit u/NeverEndingWalker64) We used Google reverse-image search to investigate the video's origins. The results showed that it had been shared on various platforms such as Reddit, X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram. Reddit X YouTube TikTok Instagram Probably one of the most 'alien-like' species, the ribbon worm spits a living, tree-like proboscis to hunt it preypic.twitter.com/s71zUbNkvH pic.twitter.com/s71zUbNkvH  Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) October 23, 2023 October 23, 2023  The earliest instance of the video being shared we found was a re-post of a TikTok video by @thatcherisdeadding Reddit user from 2021. re-post and what is it doingbyu/thatcherisdeadding inwhatsthisbug and what is it doing u/thatcherisdeadding whatsthisbug  Unfortunately, the @_pharouque TikTok account credited in the above-mentioned post was not active as of this writing. account Therefore, to assess the video's authenticity, we started by researching whether ribbon worms even existed. For reference, here's Encyclopaedia Britannica description of a "ribbon worm," also called a "proboscis worm." Encyclopaedia Britannica Ribbon worm, any member of the invertebrate phylum Nemertea (sometimes called Nemertinea, or Rhynchocoela), which includes mainly free-living forms but also a few parasites of crustaceans, mollusks, and sea squirts. The majority of the approximately 900 known nemertean species are found in marine habitats. Some, however, live in freshwater or on land. The name proboscis worm derives from the muscular eversible proboscis, which is housed in a fluid-filled chamber above the gut. This tube-shaped organ, which in many aquatic forms has a needlelike stylet, is typically used to trap prey. The stylet may also be used for burrowing; in land-dwelling species it may be used for rapid movement. What's more, we found other similar videos showing a ribbon worm and its proboscis: similar A Ribbon Worm expelling an organ called its proboscis, it uses it to capture and digest prey up to three times larger than its size.byu/rAwIsDeatH innextfuckinglevel A Ribbon Worm expelling an organ called its proboscis, it uses it to capture and digest prey up to three times larger than its size. u/rAwIsDeatH nextfuckinglevel The footage attached to the above post was featured, for instance, in Science Channel's video shared in January 2016 with the title, "The Proboscis Worm's Mouth of Horrors." video  Moreover, Nature's article on the topic of ribbon worms, titled, "A poisonous shield, a potent venom: these worms mean business," read: article The wriggling creatures called ribbon worms protect themselves with toxin-laden mucus and subdue their prey with venom that they inject through a retractable proboscis. But scientists have had a limited understanding of the toxic compounds deployed by the more than 1,300 ribbon-worm species (phylum Nemertea). Finally, we found another similar video showing a ribbon worm that went viral back in 2015. viral  Mental Floss, an online magazine, in an article titled, "Meet This Bizarre and Mysterious Ribbon Worm," discussed the video above, citing biologist Sebastian Kvist, who "specializes in Nemertea, the phylum of ribbon worms this creature belongs to." Kvist explained to Mental Floss that, "The worm also throws out its proboscis as a defensive strategy  and thats what were seeing in the video," underscoring that, What were seeing is a very stressed worm thats doing everything it can to try to get away from the situation that its in. article All in all, although we did not find the original poster of the in-question video, we found other, very similar-looking footage of the ribbon worm "spitting a tree-like proboscis." Because of that, we have rated the claim as  We will update this article if/when new information comes to light on the video's origins. A Poisonous Shield, a Potent Venom: These Worms Mean Business. Nature, vol. 606, no. 7913, June 2022, pp. 230230. www.nature.com, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01484-7. Meet This Bizarre and Mysterious Ribbon Worm. Mental Floss, 20 May 2015, https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/64186/meet-bizarre-and-mysterious-ribbon-worm. Ribbon Worm | Anatomy, Habitat & Adaptations | Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/animal/ribbon-worm. Accessed 27 Dec. 2023. The Proboscis Worms Mouth of Horrors. www.youtube.com, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZCzIPPSxqY. Accessed 27 Dec. 2023. The Sad Facts behind That multiplying Ribbon Worm Video | Oceans | Earth Touch News. Earth Touch News Network, 2016, https://www.earthtouchnews.com/oceans/oceans/the-sad-facts-behind-that-multiplying-ribbon-worm-video. In September 2019, whistleblower allegations that U.S. President Donald Trump held back military aid to Ukraine in an effort to obtain damaging information on a political rival led to an impeachment inquiry and an ongoing scandal. allegations It wouldn't be the 2010s if the fallout didn't include a conspiracy theory circulating in the right-wing media ecosystem. In this case, the conspiracy theory was given a major platform in the form of a tweet by Trump that his supporters widely shared: WHO CHANGED THE LONG STANDING WHISTLEBLOWER RULES JUST BEFORE SUBMITTAL OF THE FAKE WHISTLEBLOWER REPORT? DRAIN THE SWAMP!  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 30, 2019 September 30, 2019 The claim originated on The Federalist website, which published a story on Sept. 27 that was not only inaccurate but played on the "deep state" conspiracy theory, an idea now popular among both fringe fanatics and White House officials alike. It posits that U.S. intelligence agencies are scheming against Trump. The Federalist story fringe fanatics officials The Federalist story implied that the intelligence community changed existing rules so that the "anti-Trump complaint" could be filed on Aug. 12 using secondhand information. "Between May 2018 and August 2019, the intelligence community secretly eliminated a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings," The Federalist reported. The Federalist story included purported screenshots of previous and current versions of the Disclosure of Urgent Concern form. The current form allows the whistleblower to check a box indicating that the person either learned of the information firsthand or from others, whereas the previous form contained the following language:But as Julian Sanchez, senior fellow at the libertarian think tank Cato Institute, pointed out, even the previous version shown above doesn't say there was a requirement that whistleblowers provide direct, first-hand knowledge of alleged wrongdoings. The law has never required them to do so. previous  Sanchez pointed out that the form pictured above contains a "description of the Inspector Generals (IG) standard for making a credibility determination, as required by statute, within 14 days of the submission of a complaint. According to that guidance, the IG would not make a finding of credibility, and thus transmit the complaint to the [Director of National Intelligence], unless the DNI was in possession of direct evidence supporting the claim." It does not say, Sanchez continued, "that whistleblowers may not submit reports based on secondhand knowledge, but rather that such reports will not be escalated to the DNI unless the IG can obtain more." The Intelligence Community Inspector General's Office (ICIG) was forced to issue a statement on Sept. 30 correcting the record. The statement read, in part: statement The Disclosure of Urgent Concern form the Complainant submitted on August 12, 2019 is the same form the ICIG has had in place since May 24, 2018, which went into effect before Inspector General [Michael] Atkinson entered on duty as the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community on May 29, 2018, following his swearing in as the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community on May 17, 2018. Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute. In fact, by law the Complainant  or any individual in the Intelligence Community who wants to report information with respect to an urgent concern to the congressional intelligence committees  need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law. Since Inspector General Atkinson entered on duty as the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, the ICIG has not rejected the filing of an alleged urgent concern due to a whistleblowers lack of first-hand knowledge of the allegations. In other words, the entire premise of The Federalist story is wrong. No requirement exists that whistleblowers provide firsthand knowledge of alleged wrong-doings, and changing the rules would have required an act of Congress. Tom Devine, legal director for the watchdog non-profit Government Accountability Project, called The Federalist story a "shameless legal bluff." "No bureaucrat has the lawful authority to change the rules of the game for whistleblower rights," Devine told us. "Not even the president can change that unilaterally."  So how did the claim come about? It's true that the wording on an explanatory form for whistleblowers was changed, but the rules were not. The ICIG's statement notes that the wording was revised because "certain language in those forms and, more specifically, the informational materials accompanying the forms, could be read  incorrectly  as suggesting that whistleblowers must possess first-hand information in order to file an urgent concern complaint with the congressional intelligence committees." Devine added that government whistleblowers who report allegations of wrongdoing based on hearsay are still valuable resources in ferreting out government waste, corruption, and wrongdoing. "If we restricted all credible government investigations to those with whistleblowers who have firsthand information, we'd cancel out 90% of law enforcement activity," Devine said. "Whistleblower investigations are routinely based on hearsay." The ICIG's Sept. 30 statement additionally noted that the whistleblower's complaint did not contain only secondhand, "unsubstantiated assertions." The whistleblower "checked two relevant boxes: The first box stated that, 'I have personal and/or direct knowledge of events or records involved'; and the second box stated that, 'Other employees have told me about events or records involved.'" In summary, the ICIG statement said:  [The] whistleblower submitted the appropriate Disclosure of Urgent Concern form that was in effect as of August 12, 2019, and had been used by the ICIG since May 24, 2018. The whistleblower stated on the form that he or she possessed both first-hand and other information. The ICIG reviewed the information provided as well as other information gathered and determined that the complaint was both urgent and that it appeared credible. From the moment the ICIG received the whistleblowers filing, the ICIG has worked to effectuate Congresss intent, and the whistleblowers intent, within the rule of law. The ICIG will continue in those efforts on behalf of all whistleblowers in the Intelligence Community. NBC News."Trump Admits to Discussing Biden in Scrutinized Talk with Ukrainian Leader."
23 September 2019. Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community."Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints."
30 September 2019. Carter, Brandon."READ: House Intel Committee Releases Whistleblower Complaint On Trump-Ukraine Call."
NPR.26 September 2019. Amid tense talks between Congressional Republicans and Democrats over the 2018 federal budget, the attention of many observers turned to each side's record on government spending, benefits and entitlements, and fiscal priorities.  In that vein, a widely-shared Facebook meme took aim at Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, accusing him of supporting a modified version of a long-standing liberal bte noire  drug-testing for welfare recipients.  On 21 January 2018, Facebook user Ken Stanley wrote: wrote Tom Cotton calls for every person who receives Social Security to be drug tested those who test positive will lose benefits.     This claim is false. We searched Cotton's speeches, op-eds, and press releases, as well as the Congressional Record and news archives, and found no evidence of the Senator ever having advocated such a policy. In an e-mail, a spokesperson for Cotton told us the meme was "completely false": Senator Cotton does not support (nor has he ever supported) drug testing for Social Security recipients.  Indeed, even those who call for drug-testing for welfare recipients do not typically propose the same policy for Social Security. This is because Social Security is more widely regarded as an earned benefit (workers contribute to it through payroll taxes), while programs such as housing assistance or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps) are regarded as welfare. Senator Cotton does, however, have a record of making statements and advocating policies around welfare assistance which have raised eyebrows.  In 2015, Salon and Raw Story headlines accused Cotton of "blaming" drug addiction on Social Security benefits, and claiming that receiving Social Security disability benefits causes individuals to "spiral" into drug addiction. The articles, as well as Cotton's actually comments were more nuanced.  blaming spiral In a speech at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think thank, Cotton advocated for reform of the Social Security disability system, and drew a link between population decline and social ills (including drug addiction) in certain counties and regions, and rates of Social Security disability insurance uptake:  It's hard to say what came first or caused the other: population decline or increased disability usage. Or maybe economic stagnation caused both. Regardless, there seems to be  at least at the county and regional level  something like a disability tipping point. When a county hits a certain level of disability usage, disability becomes a norm. It becomes an acceptable way of life and an alternative source of income to a good-paying, full-time job...After a certain point, when disability keeps climbing and becomes endemic, employers will struggle to find employees, or begin  or continue  to move out of the area.  Population continues to fall, and a downward spiral kicks in, driving once-thriving communities into further decline. Not only that, but once this kind of spiral begins, communities could begin to suffer other social plagues as well, such as heroin or meth addiction and associated crime. In 2014, while running for the Senate, a Huffington Post writer accused Cotton of "calling food stamp recipients addicts." Again, his comments were much more nuanced than that description.  accused According to a Huffington Post transcript of a virtual town hall hosted by Cotton in July 2014, the then-Congressman defended voting down a Democratic bill relating to agricultural payments and federal food aid, on the basis that it did not sufficiently reform the food stamps program, including by requiring drug testing for applicants: voting I dont think that we should be using farmers as a way to pack more welfare spending into Barack Obamas government, Cotton said. Nor should we have a food stamp program that isnt reformed, that doesnt have job training and work requirements, that doesnt have drug testing requirements, so we can get people who are addicted the help they need. Or make sure that long-term addicts or recidivists are not abusing taxpayer dollars. In March 2017, Cotton joined with Republican Senate colleagues in voting to nullify an Obama-era Department of Labor rule which limited the circumstances under which states could conduct drug-testing for individuals applying for unemployment insurance.  voting rule President Donald Trump later formally reversed the guideline, effectively giving states greater powers in conducting drug screening for jobless benefits. So Senator Cotton has certainly supported drug testing for welfare programs  but never for Social Security.  reversed Gauthier, Brendan. "Tom Cotton Blames Social Security for 'Heroin and Meth Addiction' Because Reasons."
 Salon. 10 November 2015. Edwards, David. "Sen. Tom Cotton: Social Security Benefits Cause People to 'Spiral Downward' Into Heroin Addiction."
 Raw Story. 9 November 2015. Lachman, Samantha. "GOP Senate Candidate Tom Cotton Calls Food Stamp Recipients 'Addicts.'"
 Huffington Post. 17 July 2014. Brady, Rep. Kevin. "House Joint Resolution 42 -- Disapproving the Rule Submitted by the Department of Labor Relating to Drug Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants."
 Congressional Record. 31 March 2017. U.S. Department of Labor. "Final Rule --Federal-State Unemployment Compensation Program; Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 Provision on Establishing Appropriate Occupations for Drug Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants."
 Federal Register. 1 August 2016. U.S. Department of Labor. "President Trump Nullifies Drug Testing Rule."
 U.S. Department of Labor. 31 March 2017. Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO In July 2020, as America's total of confirmed coronavirus cases surpassed 3.3 million, U.S. President Donald Trump criticized the advice of public health experts on how to safely reopen the country's K-12 school system during the pandemic, and campaigned in full force for in-person classes to resume nationwide. coronavirus cases criticized nationwide The push by the Republican president included threats to withhold federal funding to school systems that did not agree with his approach (see the July 8, 2020, tweet here), unsubstantiated claims that state Democrats had political motivations to keep schools closed ahead of the November 2020 election, and several media appearances in which he and ally Betsy DeVos, the secretary of education, emphasized how opening K-12 classrooms would jump-start the country's distressed economy. his approach here claims media appearances And during that parade of public events, critics of the country's top education official and the president claimed that DeVos had nonchalantly stated the cost of young American's lives should schools fully reopen during the pandemic. Facebook statuses and tweets went viral among educators, parents and activists, stating:       It's unclear from where, exactly, the claim originated. And first, to measure its legitimacy, we did some back-of-the-napkin math. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the federal government prepared for 56.6 million K-12 students in fall 2019 (50.8 million in public schools and 5.8 million in private education). That means 11,320  not 14,740  is .02% of the country's student population. National Center for Education Statistics Apart from the statement's inaccuracy, our analysis of DeVos' public appearances found no evidence to show she made the comment. We deemed several speeches at the White House, as well as televised interviews on CNN's "State of the Union" and "Fox News Sunday" on July 12, 2020, as the likely sources of inspiration for the rumor, considering the timing and content of those events. In the first of those appearances, which took place on July 7, 2020, for instance, DeVos said: State of the Union Fox News Sunday Its clear our nations schools must fully reopen and fully operate this school year. Anything short of that robs students, not to mention taxpayers, of their futures  and their futures represent our nations future. So its not a question of 'if'; its just a question of 'how.' The following day, after a meeting of the White House coronavirus task force, she made similar remarks, and praised several school systems for their quick transition to remote learning in the early weeks of the outbreak, including New York City's Success Academy Charter Schools and Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Simultaneously, she claimed, other local school districts were "doing next to nothing" to teach students during the unprecedented rules against in-classroom learning. New York City's Success Academy Charter Schools Miami-Dade County Public Schools Three days later, DeVos addressed CNN's audience via an interview on why she believed schools should fully reopen in the fall, even though the country's daily spike in COVID-19 cases was on the rise and did not show signs of a decline. There, DeVos mostly re-emphasized talking points she made during the White House briefings and downplayed the health risks to students should schools fully reopen, essentially affirming the underlying sentiment to critics' claim about the projected death toll. DeVos stated, referring to "data" that she did not define: on the rise There's nothing in the data that would suggest that kids being back in school is, is dangerous to them  in fact, it's more a matter of their health and well-being that they be back in school. In both the CNN and Fox News interviews, DeVos pointed to research that suggests children are less likely to suffer severe symptoms due to COVID-19 compared to adults.   While people of any age with certain underlying conditions are at higher risk of serious illnesses should they catch COVID-19, children are more likely than adults to have mild illnesses, and patients over the age of 18 may have different symptoms than youth, per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). According to a study of U.S. children infected with COVID-19 between February and April 2020 by the CDC, for instance, the youth population made up less than 2% of the country's cases, totaling 150,000. Additionally, three COVID-19 patients under the age of 18 died during that time frame, compared to roughly 5,450 fatal cases among adults. The study stated: study [Relatively] few children with COVID-19 are hospitalized, and fewer children than adults experience fever, cough, or shortness of breath. ... Social distancing and everyday preventive behaviors remain important for all age groups because patients with less serious illness and those without symptoms likely play an important role in disease transmission. In other words, the CDC says: "If children meet in groups, it can put everyone at risk. Children can pass this virus onto others who have an increased risk of severe illness from COVID-19." says DeVos said school systems should consider those recommendations on a case-by-case basis, and urged local leaders to consider "granular data" that depicts COVID-19's impact on their community, specifically.  However, at no point during the broadcast interviews or the previously-mentioned White House speeches in July 2020 did the education secretary make the alleged statement about a percentage of students dying as a result of COVID-19 when schools fully reopen. Additionally, there was no evidence that she had made the statement on social media accounts, nor via press releases, around the time the claim went viral. For those reasons, we rate this claim  U.S. Department of Education. Press Releases.
 Accessed 13 July 2020. Aivalis, Christo. "Data Bash GRILLS Betsy DeVos Over Trump Plan to FORCE Kids Back to Unsafe Schools."
 YouTube. 12 July 2020. New York Times. "Coronavirus in the U.S.: Latest Map and Case Count."
 The New York Times. 13 July 2020. CNN Politics. "Bash Questions DeVos: Why Do You Not Have Guidance?"
 Accessed 13 July 2020.
 Binkley, Collin. "Trump Pushes State, Local Leaders to Reopen Schools in Fall."
 The Associated Press. 7 July 2020. Seewer, John. "'Moving Target': Schools Deal with New Plans, Trump Demands."
 The Associated Press. 12 July 2020. Tanner, Lindsey. "Virus Spread, Not Politics Should Guide Schools, Doctors Say."
 The Associated Press. 12 July 2020. CDC. "Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Children  United States, February 12April 2, 2020."
 Accessed 13 July 2020. Mayo Clinic. "COVID-19 (coronavirus) in Babies and Children."
 Accessed 13 July 2020. White House. "Press Briefing by Vice President Pence and Members of the Coronavirus Task Force."
 8 July 2020. National Center for Education Statistics. "Back to School Statistics."
 Accessed 13 July 2020.

 John Hopkins University and Medicine. "Mortality Analyses."
 Accessed 13 July 2020. Correction [16 July 2020]: A paragraph comparing the ".02%" figure cited in the meme with the actual U.S. case fatality rate has been removed because the comparison was not apt. Sitting in front of a mock pharmacy and flanked by people in white lab coats, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders on July 24, 2020, that he framed as end-all solutions for Americans who struggle to pay high premium prices for prescription drugs. Of one of the directives, specifically, Trump told a crowd of supporters and reporters at the ceremony: told Under this order, the price of insulin for affected patients will come down to just pennies a day  pennies a day from numbers that you werent even able to think about. Its a massive cost savings. News outlets such as The New York Times and Washington Post described the signing event like it was largely symbolic, since the executive orders are unlikely to take effect this year, if at all (we explain more below). The New York Times Washington Post Meanwhile, at least two conservative media sources, Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire and CNSNews  which claims to balance "liberal bias" in mainstream news with its coverage  reported on the president's pledge to slash prescription prices at face value, and highlighted the above-mentioned quote by Trump regarding insulin. Daily Wire CNSNews published the story, "Trump Says Executive Order Will Drop the Price of Insulin Down to Pennies a Day," which mainly quoted the president verbatim, and numerous Snopes readers reached out to us to investigate the claim's accuracy. Namely, diabetic patients wondered whether they would indeed pay less for insulin syringes or insulin cartridges for their pens or pumps because of the president. story pens   According to a Congressional analysis in September 2019, insulin averaged $34.75 per dose in the U.S.  a total that's almost 2.5 times higher than the average price in other countries. First, we'll lay out what was unequivocally true: Trump issued Executive Order on Access to Affordable Life-saving Medications during the July 24, 2020, signing event, and that directive authorized the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make certain changes regarding the cost of EpiPens for Americans with severe allergies and the cost of insulin for those who suffer from diabetes, specifically. It stated: Executive Order on Access to Affordable Life-saving Medications Department of Health and Human Services EpiPens The price of insulin in the United States has risen dramatically over the past decade. ... While Americans with diabetes and severe allergic reactions may have access to affordable insulin and injectable epinephrine through commercial insurance or Federal programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, many Americans still struggle to purchase these products. Medicare Medicaid Here's some more context: Medicare, the federal program that covers the majority of Americans over age 65 and those with disabilities, offers plans that help diabetic patients cover the cost of some insulin products. Meanwhile, policies for Medicaid, the government-run health insurance system for low-income people, vary state by state  variances that include whether or not the program covers the cost of diabetic enrollees' insulin, or to what extent. state by state Trump's directive pertained to "federally qualified health centers" (FQHC), which are about 1,400 community health care clinics nationwide that treat low-income patients on sliding fee scales and purchase discounted drugs from pharmaceutical companies under an existing federal program, known as 340B. The July 2020 executive order was worded like this: federally qualified health centers 1,400 340B   In other words, the president's order requires participants of the 340B Program to offer insulin at greatly reduced prices to patients with no or little insurance coverage, without providing specifics on how or when the change would take effect. Advisory Board, a news site for health care providers, said in a statement: "Only patients with low incomes; those with high cost-sharing requirements for insulin or epinephrine; those with high, unmet deductibles; and/or those without health insurance would be eligible for the discount." A news release from the HHS said: statement news release This will increase access to life-saving insulin and epinephrine for the patients who face especially high costs among the 28 million patients who visit FQHCs every year, over six million of whom are uninsured. For perspective, about 34.2 million Americans had diabetes as of 2018, which represented about 10.5 percent of the population, according to the American Diabetes Association. So, hypothetically, if the same proportion of people had diabetes within the FQHC population of 28 million patients (a total reported by the HHS), then Trump's executive order could help about 2.9 million people, depending on whether their insurance already covers the treatment. American Diabetes Association So to recap, in regard to the claim in question, it was true to state Trump signed an executive order in July 2020 that aimed to make it easier for low-income diabetic patients to pay for insulin. But nowhere in the federal document did the presidential administration explain its plan for implementing the change, nor the level to which insulin prices would drop. There was no proof that the order would allow any American to someday pay "pennies a day" on the protein hormone. We should note here: In addition to that previously explained executive order, a separate directive signed by Trump on July 24, 2020, touched on a yet-to-be-finalized initiative by the White House to relax international drug importation rules and added insulin to a list of prescription medications that can be imported from Canada. The president characterized that directive, too, as a positive step for people who want lower insulin costs. separate directive yet-to-be-finalized And that brings us to our final point: Much of what Trump celebrated in the July 2020 executive orders had been proposed by his administration prior to the signing ceremony but stalled amid opposition from pharmaceutical companies and political barriers. "[None] of these ideas put forth are new, or in fact any more implementable than before, especially without congressional action, an investor told FeircePharma, a trade publication for the pharmaceutical industry. FeircePharma For instance, in May 2020, Trump unveiled a plan to cap the cost of insulin for Medicare recipients at $35 per month beginning in 2021 (even that initiative would cost patients more than "pennies a day"). But as of this writing, it was unclear exactly how that directive would roll out, and when or if qualifying seniors with diabetes would notice a price difference. The Washington Post reported on July 24, 2020: May 2020 Washington Post The moves [by Trump] are largely symbolic because the orders are unlikely to take effect anytime soon, if they do so at all, because the power to implement drug pricing policy through executive order is limited. Voters will not see an impact before the November elections, and the drug industry is sure to challenge them in court. A couple days after the July signing ceremony, for example, Politico reported that representatives of major drug lobbies refused to meet with the president to discuss one of the four executive orders: a non-specific and controversial proposal to link Medicare payments for certain medicines to lower costs that people pay in other countries. After that refusal on industry leaders' part, investors told MarketWatch that the executive orders were "largely campaign fodder" and "come without the necessary force to meaningfully change prices in the U.S."  Politico reported meet controversial MarketWatch In sum, while it was truthful to claim Trump issued an executive order in July 2020 that was intended to lower the price of insulin for some Americans, it was misleading to claim that all diabetic patients would save money as a result of the directive  the directive only targeted low-income patients who are uninsured or underinsured and seek help from certain federal community health providers. Additionally, it was unclear as of this report when, if at all, that group would actually reap the benefit of the cost savings, and the estimated amount of such was unknown. It would be wrong to state based on available evidence that the executive order alone would drive down prices to "pennies a day." For those reasons, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth and falsehoods. White House. "Executive Order On Access To Affordable Life-saving Medications".
 24 July 2020. White House. "Executive Order On Lowering Prices For Patients by Eliminating Kickbacks To Middlemen".
 24 July 2020. White House. "Executive Order On Increasing Drug Importation To Lower Prices For American Patients".
 24 July 2020. White House. "Remarks By President Trump At Signing Of Executive Orders On Lowering Drug Prices".
 24 July 2020. Sanger-Katz, Margot. "As He Woos Drugmakers On Virus, Trump Demands Drug Price Controls".
 New York Times. 24 July 2020. Arter, Melanie. "Trump Says Executive Order Will Drop the Price of Insulin Down to Pennies a Day".
 CNSNews. 24 July 2020. National Conference of State Legislatures. "Diabetes Health Coverage: State Laws And Programs".
 10 January 2016. HHS.gov. "Trump Administration Announces Historic Action To Lower Drug Prices For Americans".
 24 July 2020. American Diabetes Association. "Statistics About Diabetes".
 Accessed 30 July 2020. White House. "Executive Order On Increasing Drug Importation To Lower Prices For American Patients".
 24 July 2020. Luhby, Tami. "Trump Administration Proposes Allowing Imports Of Certain Drugs From Canada".
 CNN. 18 December 2019. O'Donnell, Carl. "Explainer: Trump's Plan To Cut Drug Prices".
 Reuters. 27 July 2020. Abutaleb, Yasmeen and Josh Dawsey. "Trump Signs Executive Orders Aimed At Lowering Drug Prices In Largely Symbolic Move".
 Washington Post. 24 July 2020. Cohen, Joshua. "Trump's Executive Orders On Drug Pricing Contain Caveats And Limitations".
 Forbes. 25 July 2020. Ways And Means Committee Staff. "A Painful Pill To Swallow: U.S. Vs. International Prescription Drug Prices".
 September 2019. Reklaitis, Victor. "Trump's Meeting With Pharma Execs Called Off, As Analysts Say His Moves On Drug Prices Lack Bite". Prestigiacomo, Amanda. "Trump Issues Executive Orders To Slash Insulin, EpiPen Prices; End 'Global Freeloading'.
 The Daily Wire. 27 July 2020. Since at least 2010, a set of awe-inspiring pictures have been shared in email forwards and on social media. The color photographs purportedly show the Russian Kalinin K-7 heavy bomber. One of the pictures was even displayed in a paid online advertisement: email forwards  The massive aircraft certainly looked quite heavy. (Courtesy: Levin)  However, while the Kalinin K-7 was once a real aircraft from the 1930s, the color pictures in question showed 3-D artist renderings.  The Kalinin K-7 heavy bomber is seen from another angle in a 3-D rendering. (Courtesy: Levin)  We were able to find the original website that hosted the original images, but it wasn't easy. At first, we thought it might be a fan-created 3-D model for the "Battlefield V" video game, as one of the color pictures appeared in the /r/BattlefieldV/ subreddit. However, this was incorrect. /r/BattlefieldV/ subreddit Lots of reading of old blogs and message boards, combined with reverse image searching, finally led us to the original source. Thanks to a tip from englishrussia.com, we found the source to be a person using the handle "Levin." tip On the original page, which appeared to be from 2007, Levin wrote that his work had been misunderstood: original page In view of the fact that this work is discussed at various serious forums on aviation and military affairs, and it is being discussed, apparently, without a clear understanding of the purpose of this work and the attitude of the author himself (i.e. me) to what he did here, I want to warn you in advance - everything that lies below is nothing more than the usual techno-fantasy, techno-utopia, if you like - techno-absurdity. There are no serious applications on my part for something that can fly, and there cannot be. This work is an attempt to reproduce, quite possibly taking place in reality in the 30s, an attempt by some hypothetical and not quite healthy and poorly educated designer to build such an absurdity with state money. I can even assume that as a result, this hypothetical poor fellow-designer was again hypothetically arrested and soon shot for senseless waste of folk funds on an especially large scale. ))) And the main task from the point of view of technical reliability here was only to comply with the technical style of those years, so that the engines and other parts did not look taken from other eras. So if there is something worth discussing for aviation connoisseurs, then only this moment is the correspondence of the appearance of the parts and the whole structure in general to the level of aviation development in the early 30s of the 20th century. Levin also confirmed that Adobe Photoshop was not used in the process to make the renders. "This is not Photoshop. This is 3-D, three-dimensional models." WarHistoryOnline.com published the history of the real Kalinin K-7 heavy bomber, which was smaller than what was displayed for the 3-D renderings. "The Kalinin K-7 was a heavy experimental aircraft designed and tested in the Soviet Union in the early 1930s," the website read. "It was of unusual configuration with twin booms and large underwing pods housing fixed landing gear and machine gun turrets." published  The real Kalinin K-7 was large, but not as massive as the aircraft seen in the 3-D renderings.  Unfortunately, the aircraft had a brief history. On Nov. 21, 1933, the aircraft crashed. crashed  A flight crew stands in front of a Kalinin K-7 heavy bomber.  According to WarHistoryOnline.com, the accident "killed 14 people aboard and one on the ground." The K-7 first flew on 11 August 1933. The very brief first flight showed instability and serious vibration caused by the airframe resonating with the engine frequency. The solution to this was thought to be to shorten and strengthen the tail booms, little being known then about the natural frequencies of structures and their response to vibration. The aircraft completed seven test flights before a crash due to structural failure of one of the tail booms on 21 November 1933. The project was eventually scrapped in 1935. No known color photographs of the aircraft exist today. Levin, the 3-D artist, published more of his computer-generated work on his old website. One of them showed quite the battle in the skies:  The Kalinin K-7 heavy bomber battles an unidentified foe in this 3-D rendering. (Courtesy: Levin)  In sum, the Kalinin K-7 heavy bomber was real. However, color pictures that appeared in email forwards, social media, and ads were nothing more than 3-D renderings. Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us Claim:  Berkshire Hathaway, the legendary business concern headed by Warren Buffett and new owner of Pampered Chef, supports pro-choice causes.  Status:  Sort of. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003] Dear Friend: I am a Pampered Chef consultant who has recently learned that, due to the sale of The Pampered Chef toBerkshire Hathaway (www.berkshirehathaway.com/news/oct3102.html), Pampered Chef profits are now supporting the population control and abortion industries. These industries trade in the death of countless pre-born children, endanger the health of women, and deny the human rights of women in third world countries through forced sterilizations and abortions. Not only does Berkshire Hathaway contribute to these industries, but Warren Buffett, chief shareholder of Berkshire Hathaway, has pledged to bequeath the majority of his personal fortune (28 billion) to The Buffett Foundation, positioning him to become the largest financier of abortion and population control in the history of the world. www.berkshirehathaway.com/news/oct3102.html As a result of this information, I have ceased to sell or recruit for The Pampered Chef. I have also launched an e-mail campaign to (1) educate Pampered Chef consultants, hosts and customers of the connection between The Pampered Chef and the population control and abortion industries; and (2) petition Warren Buffett to cease his personal and corporate financial support of these same industries. Origins:  In October 2002, Berkshire Hathaway acquired The Pampered Chef, a kitchen products company which vends items atin-home cooking demonstrations known as Kitchen Shows and is run by kitchen consultants (its name for the members of its sale force). More than one million of these events were held in the United States in 2002, and Pampered Chef has annual sales in excess of $700 million. Berkshire Hathaway The Pampered Chef kitchen consultants Besides Pampered Chef, Berkshire Hathaway owns a number of businesses outright (including Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom, Geico Insurance, and See's Candies) and also has significant holdings in some very large corporations, including  Coca-Cola. The motive force behind Berkshire Hathaway is its chairman and chief executive, Warren Buffett. Although Buffett is reckoned to be the second wealthiest man in the world, he still lives in the Omaha, Nebraska, home he purchased for $31,500 in 1958. His charitable organization, the Buffett Foundation, currently has $25.3 million in assets, and these holdings are expected to swell to $36 billion when Buffett and his wife die and their shares in Berkshire Hathaway go to the Buffett Foundation, which will make it the richest charitable foundation in the world. About 60 percent of the $33.4 million bestowed by the Buffett Foundation in fiscal year 2001 went toward family planning, reproductive rights, and population control programs operated by organizations such as Planned Parenthood, Johns Hopkins University, and the United Nations in accordance with Warren Buffett's beliefs that population growth must be checked before exceeding a level sustainable by the earth's resources. The Buffett Foundation also funds a number of college scholarships and awards in recognition of exemplary teachers. In July 2003 Berkshire Hathaway announced the end of its shareholder-designated contribution program, through which holders of A shares in Berkshire Hathaway could select the charities to which Berkshire Hathaway would donate funds.  It noted the shareholders' choices of certain charities (including some of Buffett's choices) had caused "harmful criticism" to be directed at Pampered Chef and cited that criticism as the reason for ending the donations program.  Berkshire said all its subsidiaries will continue to support local charities under direction of their local managers. What all this means is that Berkshire Hathaway itself no longer contributes money directly to various charities (controversial or otherwise) designated by its shareholders.  However, since Warren Buffett (as a private individual) holds shares in Berkshire Hathaway and is free to contribute the profit he derives from those holdings to The Buffett Foundation, the businesses owned by Berkshire Hathaway (such as The Pampered Chef) are indirectly providing money to the causes Buffett supports through his foundation. Barbara "missed hathaway" Mikkelson Additional Information:    Berkshire Hathaway holdings      Berkshire Hathaway press release  Last updated:  28 November 2007    Sources:   Jordon, Steve.  "Introductory Lesson on Warren Buffett."   Omaha World Herald.  3 May 2003  (p. D5).     Kawar, Mark.  "Touched by a Billionaire."   Omaha World Herald.  4 May 2003  (p. D1).     Shim, Grace.  "Berkshire Pantry Adds Pampered Chef."   Omaha World Herald.  24 September 2003  (p. D1).     Shim, Grace.  "Lasting Legacy."   Omaha World Herald.  27 April 2003  (p. D1).     The Associated Press.  "Berkshire Hathaway Ends Charity Program Over Criticism."   3 July 2003. Claim:  Actor Clint Eastwood narrated an anti-Obama "Halftime in America" spot.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, June 2012] A second Halftime by Clint Eastwood was sent to me and it was not the same commercial message as the original by Clint Eastwood in the end he refers to Obama as your skinny ass Question is the second one a fake.  Half time in america is on you tube and claims to be by clint eastwood.  can you check the validity.  Looks like they cut and pasted abit...  I saw a video of Clint Eastwood talking about it being halftime in America and I wanted to know if it was a real video or a reworkedvideo.  It was supposedly on youtube.   Origins:  One of the most talked-about commercials to air during Super Bowl XLVI in February 2012 was Chrysler's controversial two-minute long "Halftime in America" spot, narrated by actor Clint Eastwood:  The commercial prompted a good deal of debate about whether it was more a promotion for Chrysler's products or an endorsement of President Obama and the federal government's bailouts of the automobile industry: People rarely pick a fight with Dirty Harry. But Chrysler's "Halftime in America" ad featuring quintessential tough guy Clint Eastwood has generated fierce debate about whether it accurately portrays the country's most economically distressed city or amounts to a campaign ad for President Barack Obama and the auto bailouts. The 2-minute ad holds up Detroit as a model for American recovery while idealistic images of families, middle class workers and factories  scroll across the screen. "People are out of work and they're hurting," the 81-year-old Eastwood says in his trademark gravelly voice. "And they're all wondering what they're gonna do to make a comeback. And we're all scared because this isn't a game. The people of Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we all pulled together. Now, Motor City is fighting again." Conservatives, including GOP strategist Karl Rove, criticized the ad as a not-so-thinly veiled endorsement of the federal government's auto industry bailouts. Others questioned basing a story of economic resurgence in a city that remains in fiscal disarray, with a $200 million budget deficit and cash flow concerns that have it fending off a state takeover. Within days of the Super Bowl a number of parodies of the "Halftime in America" spot began to appear on the Internet, including the one displayed in the Example box above, which edited the original and replaced Eastwood's narration with a sound-alike voicing anti-Obama sentiments, ending with the invocation "all that matters now is that we come together as one great nation and kick his skinny butt back to Chicago." parodies Eastwood himself indicated in a November 2011 interview with the Los Angeles Times When I push back at his criticism of the auto company bailout, he flashes one of his trademark Eastwood squints, the kind of squint that has made hundreds of bad guys quake in their boots. "Look at me," he said evenly. "Ive had to make films for less money or go out and find my own money. On 'Mystic River,' I had to cut my salary and everyone elses to get it made. I know the score. If I start to grind out two or three turkeys, Ill be unemployed, just like anyone else." Last updated:  11 June 2012    Goldstein, Patrick.  "Clint Eastwood Talks Politics: Who's the Democrat He Voted For?"   Los Angeles Times.  7 November 2011.    Associated Press.  "'Halftime in America' Ad Creates Political Debate."   FOXNews.com.  6 February 2012.