Facebook Car Giveaway can be rephrased as "Car giveaway hosted on Facebook."
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.
We can't all be famous, but many people who aren't have tried the next best thing: associating themselves with someone famous.  Others, denied the opportunity even to hobnob with anyone of renown, have taken the process a step further and manufactured such associations themselves.  A particularly prevalent genre of "brush with fame" legends involves those who claim to have had chance encounters with notable personages during their formative years, contributing something  an idea, a suggestion, or maybe just a helping hand  that had a lasting impact and aided those later-famous people in becoming successful in some artistic, scientific, or political endeavor.  After all, the early lives of people who later become famous are often not well documented, making it difficult to dispute a claimant's tale of a chance encounter way back when. Not surprisingly, Walt Disney is the subject of several such legends, in this case one having to do with the site of his birth and the origin of his given name. In 1982, the Robinson Argus newspaper, based in Robinson, Illinois, published a local resident's recollection of the putative circumstances surrounding Walt's birth: So many great people were born in Robinson! And, now we must add Walt Disney to the list. The Argus is indebted to Doris Davis and Ada York for the surprising information that the famous Walt Disney actually was born in Robinson. On Friday, February 12, Ada gave the following information to Doris Davis, who in turn brought it to the Argus on Monday of this week. This is February 12, 1982, at Cotillion Ridge, and this is Ada talking to Doris Davis: "In 1925-26 I worked for Mr. George Walter on West Plum Street. This was a time when Walt Disney was coming into great popularity. He told me that several people knew that Walt Disney was born in Robinson and I asked him how he developed the knowledge and he said that he owned the brick yard at the time and they were migrating through Robinson back to Chicago and ran out of money while in this town. Mr. Walter gave him a job and he got a room over what is now the Rembrandt Studio and their baby was due at any time. When the baby was born, it was a boy and they named him Walter for Mr. Walter who had been so kind to them and gave Mr. Disney work to enable him to support his wife and baby son." Doris: "Later, you heard an interview?" Ada: "Yes! Edward R. Murrow interviewed Walt Disney and he asked him where he was born. Walt Disney said, 'Well the record shows that I was born in Chicago, but actually I was born in a little town 200 miles south  Robinson!' So that sort of tied the ends together!" It's a charming story, but the logical holes in its premise and timeline are legion:  Every significant piece of Disney biography states that Walt was born in an upstairs bedroom of his parents' house in Chicago.  If Walt had publicly stated, to a news reporter as prominent as Edward R. Murrow, that he was actually born somewhere else, how is it that  fact has somehow eluded every Disney biographer to the point that none of them so much as mention it?  And if Walt both knew and publicly proclaimed that he was really born in Robinson, why did he nonetheless maintain in his autobiography (published under his daughter's name) that he was indeed born in Chicago?  Walt Disney's parents could not have been "migrating back to Chicago" just before his birth in 1901, as they had been living in Chicago continuously ever since 1889.  Even if Elias Disney, Walt's father, had some reason to travel away from Chicago in late 1901, it is extremely unlikely (given the rigors of travel in those days) that he would have taken a heavily-pregnant wife along with him except under the most exigent of circumstances (and there is no record of any such circumstances affecting the Disney family in 1901).  The account quoted above states that a brickyard owner in Robinson gave Elias Disney work immediately after Walt's birth "to enable him to support his wife and baby son."  By the time Walt came along, the Disneys already had three children  who was taking care of them?  Surely Mr. and Mrs. Disney had not left their three young sons behind somewhere to fend for themselves, so why does this recollection fail to mention anyone but Walt?  Why in the world would the Disneys, who already had a permanent home in Chicago (in a house built by Elias himself), have been traipsing around the countryside with three children in tow and Mrs. Disney about to give birth to a fourth?  (Again, there is no record of the Disneys having left their three eldest children in someone else's care for an extended period of time just before Walt's birth.)  The statement that Walt Disney was "coming into great popularity" in 1925-26 (a claim made to explain why the narrator clearly remembered a story she'd been told over fifty years earlier  obviously she wouldn't have found the tale so memorable if Walt Disney wasn't already famous when she heard it) is a bit off the mark: the debut of the character who made the name 'Disney' a household word, Mickey Mouse, was still several years in the future, and even Disney's first successful animated character, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, would not first appear until late 1927.  Disney had moderate success in the mid-1920s with his Alice in Cartoonland series (short silent films which mixed live action and animation), but he was hardly a nationally-known figure in 1926.  (As a point of comparison, we note that although Disney began working in Los Angeles in early 1923, his name appeared in the pages of the Los Angeles Times but once prior to 1929.) Oswald the Lucky Rabbit Alice in Cartoonland  Wherever Walt may have been born (and no matter what the circumstances of his birth), his given name was demonstrably not the result of a spur-of-the-moment decision by his parents to honor someone who had aided them at the time of Walt's birth in 1901.  As the following birth record demonstrates, the Disneys had already selected "Walter" as a name for one of their sons as far back as 1890:  Walt Disney, of course, was not born until 1901  this certificate, which documents a birth on 30 December 1890, records the arrival of one of Walt's older brothers, Raymond Arnold Disney.  Evidently Mr. and Mrs. Disney considered naming one of their earlier children "Walter" to the extent that that name was listed on the birth certificate, but they later changed their minds and named him "Raymond" instead.  The important point, however, is that this certificate documents the Disneys had the name "Walter" in mind for one of their sons a full eleven years before Walt was born. So, we leave off where we began, by noting that people sometimes manufacture their own brushes with greatness, as was evidently the case here. To mangle a familiar phrase: "Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some fabricate greatness out of whole cloth." Cooper, Jacob.  "Comics Mean Hard Labor."
 Los Angeles Times.  13 April 1930  (p. B11). Eliot, Marc.  Walt Disney: Hollywood's Dark Prince.
  New York: Birch Lane Press, 1993.  ISBN 1-55972-174-X. Miller, Diane Disney.  The Story of Walt Disney.
  New York: Dell, 1957. Mosley, Leonard.  Disney's World.
  New York: Stein and Day, 1985  (pp. 16-21). Thomas, Bob.  Walt Disney: An American Original.
  New York: Simon and Schuster, 1976.  ISBN 0-7868-6027-8  (p. 24). Thomas, Bob.  Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire.
  New York: Hyperion, 1998.  ISBN 0-7868-6200-9  (pp. 1-16). Los Angeles Times.  "Actors Mix with Cartoons."
  6 July 1924  (p. B31). Los Angeles Times.  "Maclean Provides Screen Fun."
  28 September 1929  (p. A9). The Robinson Argus.  "Many Great People Born in Robinson  Even Walt Disney."
  25 February 1982. In early March 2021, Snopes readers asked about screenshots of what appeared to be a scam circulating on the payment platform Venmo. The alleged scam shows a Venmo user sending $600 to another user and then requesting it back, claiming to have sent it to the wrong person:   Although we don't know the intentions of the Venmo user involved in the above exchange (and we cropped the person's name out for privacy reasons), sending money to strangers and then requesting it back is a known type of scam on Venmo. known The Dayton Daily News, a Dayton, Ohio-based daily newspaper, described how the scam works: Even Venmo is aware of these scams and puts a warning on its website that Venmo is designed for payments between people who trust each other because there is no protection for the buyer or seller. Therefore, its important you dont accept or give money to strangers who could potentially be scammers. For example, scammers connect stolen credit cards to Venmo and use them to transfer money to unsuspecting users. If you send the money back to the scammer, he or she will delete the stolen credit card from the account and add his or her own card in its place. Others send screenshots of fake emails that make it seem like theyve paid you through the app, when they actually havent.  The Better Business Bureau (BBB) also warns against this type of scam, in which a cash app user "accidentally" sends a stranger a payment and then requests that they send it back. The BBB advises that if you are targeted in an exchange like this, don't send the money back. Instead, ask the other person to simply cancel the transaction. warns against "The sender can request that the vendor cancel the transaction. If the person refuses, its probably a scam," the BBB states. The BBB also encourages cash app users to check their security settings and to link their accounts to credit cards instead of debit cards or bank accounts because, in the event that you are scammed, it's easier to recoup the money if you charged it to a credit card. In June 2014 Facebook users began seeing posts pointing to a purported video clip entitled "You Will Not Use Head & Shoulders Shampoo After Watching This Video," which supposedly graphically illustrated the deleterious effects of using that popular  brand of shampoo.  (Later versions substituted Dove brand shampoo for Head & Shoulders.)  The static image accompanying the posts was the one displayed above, which allegedly pictures some form of bizarre injury or infection that befall a user of that brand of shampoo. The image itself is a hoax, a fabrication that imitates a notorious fake photograph of a supposed 'breast rash caused by South American larvae' (created by merging a picture of a lotus seed pod with a picture of a human shoulder) which has been circulating on the Internet since 2003 and that was earlier used as the subject of a Twitter jape: breast rash lotus seed pod  The referenced video does not exist, and the purpose of the hoax was to serve as a lure in leading users to yet another survey scam: those who clicked through on the teaser link hoping to view the Head & Shoulders video were instead taken to a screen that forced them to first share the link with others on Facebook and/or verify their age by completing a survey that promised a $100 VISA Gift Card for its completion: survey   Of course, getting that "free" $100 gift card required  as explained in tiny type at the bottom of the survey page  that participants first sign up for several different offers, each of which required them to purchase something, subscribe to something, or apply (and be accepted for) a credit card or loan: Purchase Requirements. Incentives are split into two tiers: Tier 1 incentives with a value of $100 or less and Tier 2 incentives with a value more than $100. To qualify for a Tier 1 incentive you must complete 2 Silver, 2 Gold and 1 Platinum offer. To qualify for a Tier 2 incentive, you must complete 2 Silver, 2 Gold, and 6 Platinum offers. You must complete all offers within 30 days from when you complete your first offer. Completion of offers usually requires a purchase, subscription or filing a credit application and being accepted for a financial product such as a credit card or consumer loan. The best way to handle such scamming come-ons is to give them a wide berth: do not click through on associated links, don't share those links on Facebook, and do not participate in any related surveys. Claim: Legislation guaranteeing blacks the right to vote in the USA will expire in 2007.  Status:  False. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 1997] As everyone should be aware, in 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voters Rights Act.  This was created to allow Blacks the right to vote.  In 1982, President Ronald Reagan signed an amendment to extend this right for an additional twenty-five years.  You guessed it . . .  In 2007 (ten years from now), Congress will decide whether or not Blacks should retain the right to vote.  In order for this to be passed, thirty-eight states will have to approve an extension. For me, as well as many others, this was the first time that we had heard this  thus, bringing concern to all of us!  What many Blacks before us fought and even died for as well as the milestones that we, as Blacks have achieved, this can be taken away from us . . . AGAIN! If this issue has taken you by surprise as well, I encourage YOU to contact your Congressperson, alderperson, senator  anyone in government, that you put your vote behind and ask them what are they doing to  firstly,  to get the extension and furthermore, make our right to vote a LAW.  This has to become a law in order for our right to vote to no longer be up for discussion, review and/or evaluation.  (Remember: Blacks are the only group of people who require permission under the United States Constitution to vote!) As Black people, we cannot "drop the ball" on this one!  We have come too far to be  forced to take such a large step back.  So, please let's push on and forward to continue to build the momentum towards gaining equality. Please pass this on to others, as I am sure that many more individuals are not aware of this. Origins:  It's a scenario that should send chills up and down the spine of everyone who believes in America, democracy, and equality.  The right of every citizen to vote is the foundation of our democracy  it's how we ensure that our government is responsive and responsible to us, the people. The thought that anyone  especially a group of people who were treated as chattel, enslaved, and denied basic civil rights until just over a century ago  could lose that fundamental right is horrifying. The idea that people who were kept legally segregated from the rest of society until only a few decades ago could find themselves unable to redress their grievances at the ballot box is appalling.  And the notion that the good deeds of the hundreds of thousands of brave men and women who gave their lives to ensure that everyone, regardless of race, have the right to vote could be capriciously invalidated at the whim of modern day politicians is mortifying.  Fortunately, it isn't  so. Two constitutional amendments that followed the conclusion of the long and bloody U.S. Civil War in 1865 were the 13th amendment, which abolished slavery, and the 15th amendment, which guaranteed the right of all citizens to vote (provided they were male and at least 21).  Sadly, passing a law and enforcing a law have often proved to be two very different things. So it was in this case. 13th amendment 15th amendment Despite the 15th Amendment, many states in the South enacted Jim Crow voting requirements that effectively prevented blacks from voting.  Poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses, and other strategems were adopted to ensure that only whites entered polling places on election day.  If those schemes failed, intimidation, force, and violence were handy alternatives.  Not until the Supreme Court decided Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954 was segregation declared unconstitutional, and even then  nearly a hundred years after the end of the Civil War  many blacks were still being denied the right to vote guaranteed to them by the Constitution since 1870. The remedy to this injustice was President Lyndon Johnson's proposal  and Congress' passage  of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  It didn't guarantee blacks the right to vote; they'd already held that right since the ratification of the 15th Amendment ninety-five years earlier. The Voting Rights Act provided for enforcement of that right.  The Voting Rights Act authorized the federal government to send federal registrars to counties where local registrars refused to accept the registration of black voters, to send observers to monitor elections and ensure that blacks were allowed to vote (and that their votes were actually counted), and to mandate that certain areas obtain the approval of the Attorney General before making changes to their voting requirements or procedures. The Voting Rights Act was never intended to be in force permanently.  It was initially effective for a period of five years; that period was later extended for another five years, then another seven years, and finally for another twenty-five years, ending in 2007.  Even if the Voting Rights Act is not extended again in 2007, this will not mean that the right to vote will "be taken away" from blacks  it will simply mean that the federal government will no longer require states to seek federal approval before changing their voting laws.  We should see this as a positive  that we as a society have finally (if slowly and painfully) progressed to the point we no longer need to take special measures to ensure that every citizen has a fair opportunity to participate in a democratic voting process.  There are times when we should get all riled up about what our government is doing, but this isn't one of them. Additional information:         Voting Rights Act Clarification   (U.S. Department of Justice)   Last updated:  8 February 2007    Sources:   Boychuk, Ben.  "Colorblind or Color Conscious?"   Investor's Business Daily.  13 July 1998.     Cosby, Camille.  "Prejudice Permeates American Culture."   USA Today.  8 July 1998.     Donald, David Herbert.  Lincoln.   New York: Simon and Schuster, 1995.  ISBN 0-684-80846-3.     Shepard, Paul.  "Black Voting Rumor Surfacing on Web."   Associated Press.  2 December 1998. Known as a famous Hollywood actor and one of the original men to portray the iconic character James Bond, Sean Connery died on Oct. 31, 2020. According to TMZ, he died at 1:30 a.m. "at his home in the Bahamas." TMZ Sean Connery died in his sleep from pneumonia, heart failure and old age ... according to his death certificate. TMZ obtained Connery's death cert and it shows he died from respiratory failure as a result of pneumonia, old age and atrial fibrillation ... an irregular heart rate that can increase the risk of strokes, heart failure and other heart-related complications. Entertainment Tonight made contact with the family, reporting that "Connery's wife, Micheline Roquebrune, and his two sons, Jason and Stephane, told ET that he died peacefully in his sleep, surrounded by family." reporting Following his death, at least one advertiser bought ad space on the social media platform Reddit, or on a mobile app that displays Reddit content. The ad read: "sean connery's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears." Connery's name was lowercase, likely because the "Net Worth Left His Family In Tears" part is a template. It's not true. It's fabricated and completely baseless. Sean Connery's family was not left "in tears" because of his net worth. We previously reported on the "net worth left his family in tears" advertising ploy with "Jeopardy" host Alex Trebek. The late Kenny Rogers also appeared to be a victim of the ploy. previously reported appeared   The advertisement in question appeared to lead to Life Exact, a viral content website. It was first documented by Reddit user JezCon. It's unclear if the advertisement is still active on the website. We were unable to locate the ad, but it likely lead to a slideshow with multiple pages, where the idea was to make more money on the advertisements displayed during the slideshow than it cost to run the original ad alongside Reddit content. This is known as advertising "arbitrage." first documented Business and technology blog Margins is managed by Ranjan Roy and Can Duruk, and Roy defined "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." He also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." Margins 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 In early February 2024, Apple released the long-awaited Vision Pro headset. As Reuters reported, the headset "blends three-dimensional digital content with a view of the outside world." While some commentators claimed the device represented a "new tech dystopia," others suggested that it was predicted by the TV series "The Simpsons." released reported claimed On Feb. 5, 2024, a video went viral on Reddit, with the caption "The Simpsons predicted the Apple Vision Pro." The same claim was also spread on other social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, and TikTok. video X YouTube TikTok The Simpsons predicted the Apple Vision Pro. byu/adityapixel inBeAmazed The Simpsons predicted the Apple Vision Pro.  u/adityapixel BeAmazed  The topic was also covered in the Daily Mail, New York Post, and The Independent. "The Simpsons predicted revolutionary $3,500 Apple Vision EIGHT years before fans flocked to buy newest tech and show them off in everyday life," Daily Mail headline read. Daily Mail New York Post The Independent In short, although the clip really is from the series, the claim that "The Simpsons" predicted the Apple Vision Pro is false. The clip originated from "The Simpsons" Episode 2 of Season 28, Friends and Family, aired in October 2016 (the in-question scene starts about 20:00 in the episode). originated First of all, virtual reality (VR) is not a new concept. By 2016, when the Friends and Family episode aired, companies such as Oculus VR had introduced their VR headsets to the market, so the concept of people using such devices was not a novel prediction by "The Simpsons." The show, known for its satirical take on societal trends and technological advancements, was merely reflecting the growing interest in VR technology that was already present at the time. Thus, attributing the anticipation of Apple's Vision Pro to "The Simpsons" series overlooks the fact that the technology was already known to the public and evolving rapidly at the time. virtual reality Oculus VR   (Olaf Carlson looks up during a press demonstration at The Village event space in San Francisco, California, on March 15, 2016. Getty Images) We have covered similar dubious "Simpsons" Predictions in the past. For instance, we investigated whether an episode predicted the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In September 2023, we also debunked a claim that the series predicted the Tesla Cybertruck. "Simpsons" Predictions investigated debunked Friends and Family. The Simpsons, directed by Mike B. Anderson and Lance Kramer, 2 Oct. 2016. Friends and Family - The Simpsons (Series 28, Episode 2) - Apple TV (OM). AppleTV, 2 Oct. 2016, https://tv.apple.com/om/episode/friends-and-family/umc.cmc.5gyk9l73m6w6rqb32aji5hue3?showId=umc.cmc.1kfo3z1jtaj8ff6wsh9cvxbwu.
Heres When You Can Buy Oculuss Long-Awaited Virtual Reality Headset. TIME, 11 June 2015, https://time.com/3918081/oculus-rift-release-date-microsoft/. Kasprak, Alex. The Simpsons Predicted Teslas Cybertruck? Snopes, 8 Sept. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/simpsons-predicted-cybertruck/.
 Nellis, Stephen, and Dawn Chmielewski. Vision Pro Headset Is Apples next Mac and TV Combined. Reuters, 3 Feb. 2024. www.reuters.com, https://www.reuters.com/technology/vision-pro-headset-is-apples-next-mac-tv-combined-2024-02-03/.
 Virtual Reality (VR) | Definition, Development, Technology, Examples, & Facts | Britannica. 1 Feb. 2024, https://www.britannica.com/technology/virtual-reality. Wrona, Aleksandra. The Simpsons Predicted 9/11 Attack on World Trade Center? Snopes, 11 Sept. 2023, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/simpsons-predicted-wtc/. A Michigan businessman abandoned his State Senate campaign in early February 2018, after making derogatory Facebook comments about the judge who sentenced osteopath Larry Nassar in a case involving the sexual abuse of hundreds of American gymnasts. campaign Michael Saari of Walled Lake, Michigan, faced backlash to comments posted days after Judge Rosemarie Aquilina sentenced Nassar to a cumulative 175-year prison sentence on multiple counts of sexually abusing young girls in his care. As part of a Facebook discussion in response to the sentencing, Saari wrote: Judge was wrong for her personal vocal opinions on record ... That should be a crime against jurisprudence itself ... Lastly, what do you think this feminazi judge would say if her husband asked for a BJ? Saari deleted his Facebook account, but several observers managed to keep a record of this exchange by taking screen shots of his controversial posts. screen shots Saari originally told WWJ that he could not recall writing the comments, saying "I post a lot."  However, he later admitted that he posted the remarks, in an interview with local ABC affiliate WXYZ, saying: "Yes, absolutely." WWJ WXYZ Saari doubled down on his criticism of Aquilina but said he should have chosen a different way to articulate his views: "If I was to do it all over again, I probably would not have used such a derogatory terminology."  Facebook users also uncovered several troubling earlier posts he appears to have published, including one from 2016 in which he appears to defend adult men marrying and having sex with pre-pubescent girls. According to several screen shots, the posts included the following comments: screen shots Woman [sic] don't seem to understand that from the very beginning of time men have taken young girls (Prior to periods) as wives and concubines. Even the bible talks of this so don't make it sound like men that are attracted to 12 year old girls are sick...It's you woman [sic] that can't get a grip on reality is whats sick... It's only normal and you can't change normal or a persons DNA... In a 1 February interview with a Michigan-based Patch site, Saari denied having written those words. According to Patch, Saari said he believed someone had fabricated the screen shots, and added: "Ive never made those comments. Its not my character." interview On 5 February, however, Saari told us by phone that although the post was authentic and was published by his Facebook account it was the result of a hack and that he personally did not write it: "When I ran for Congress as a Democrat in 2014, my Facebook was hacked ... The biblical thing [the post about young girls] did not come from me." However, the post in question was published in 2016. When we asked Saari whether his Facebook account had remained hacked for two years, he replied "From what I can understand, yes," adding, "I'm not a computer guy." Ian Bancroft, a financial advisor and, like Saari, a fishing enthusiast, took part in the 2016 Facebook exchange and told local Fox News affiliate WJBK "It was definitely him," adding "It was a weekly occurrence for him to comment obscenities on news articles or in a lot of the fly fishing groups that were racist comments, things like that." WJBK For his part, Saari told us he does not defend or support the practice of adult men marrying or having sex with pre-pubescent girls: "Absolutely not. If I had a daughter, I think I'd go berserk if anyone was even looking at my daughter." Saari said he believed the post was designed by hackers to portray him as a "child molester" and thereby inflict the maximum possible damage on his political career: "The Democrat party or whoever it was who sabotaged my campaign knew there could be nothing heavier than that." It didn't end there. Facebook users have also condemned a series of posts from Saari's account which contained racially charged, derogatory language and appeared to support racial segregation. support In one 2016 post, Saari appeared to speculate that an African-American U.S. navy veteran who runs a Michigan fishing non-profit was a "butler" and in another, he sent the same man a diatribe in which he castigated black people for 'struggling to imitate and shadow' what Saari called "white people activities." post another Saari denied writing either of these posts and attributed them to the alleged hacking of his account. He told us the "butler" post "was the first time I suspected my computer had been hacked," after he received messages from Facebook friends asking whether he had really written the derogatory post himself. When asked, the former candidate told us he supported racial equality, saying: "I'm a Christian. I'm no better than a Filipino or a black person or an Indian." When asked if he supported racial mixing, Saari said "I don't advocate racial mixing, I'm not advocating it. I've never given it a whole lot of thought." On the right to marry a person from a different race, Saari told us his position was "If they're in love it doesn't matter. I don't care if they're gay, lesbian, black or white. I don't care. People have the freedom to do what they want to do. This is America." When asked, Saari said he had not notified Facebook that he believed his account had been hacked and told us the damage to his reputation was so extreme that such efforts would be a waste of time.  He added: "There's nothing I can do to redeem my name in politics." Three months later, Saari seemingly admitted he had made the Facebook post about sex with pre-pubescent girls that he had previously denied (his comments on the matter were far from clear) and maintained that he had not, in fact, dropped out of the state senate race: admitted  In the end, Saari lost the August 2018 Republican primary by an overwhelming 90-10 margin: primary  Golden, Rebecca. "Candidate Who Slammed Nassar Judge Drops Out of State Senate Race."
 Patch Media (Detroit.) 1 February 2018. WWJ. "Michigan Senate Candidate Allegedly Calls Nassar Judge 'Feminazi.'"
 WWJ. 29 January 2018. Wimbley, Randy. "Ex-State Senate Candidate Makes More Offensive Facebook Comments."
 WJBK. 3 February 2018. This page and its status was updated to reflect Saari's later statement that he was not dropping out of the state senate race and his eventual loss in the Republican primary. In mid-July 2023, the Screen Actors Guild and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), the union representing Hollywood actors and performers, voted to go on strike against major studios after negotiations broke down. voted A tweet by @KeatonPatti went viral on July 13, 2023, purporting to show a screenshot of a tweet and video in which O.J. Simpson appeared to show his support for the strike. The screenshot shows Simpson wearing a green shirt while standing in front of flowers. An overlaid caption quotes him as saying, "As a proud SAG member, I can't wait to join you all on the picket line." tweet The screenshot also indicates that Simpson tweeted from his official Twitter account, adding the words, "Union strong. #SAGStrike." Oh no. pic.twitter.com/Cbx0lXJ8w5 pic.twitter.com/Cbx0lXJ8w5  Keaton Patti (@KeatonPatti) July 13, 2023 July 13, 2023  However, the screenshot is fake. There is no evidence that Simpson issued such a tweet, nor that he made a video in which he expressed support for the guild strike. The writer Keaton Patti, who has previously written stories for humor sites like The Onion, likely shared this screenshot as a joke. Indeed, the replies to the tweet are largely joking about the impact the spectacle of the controversial figure joining the strikes would have. replies We went to Simpson's Twitter account, which primarily consists of videos of him sharing his views on a range of topics, but found no tweets in which he expressed support for the strike. The screenshot was likely created by editing a real screenshot from a July 11, 2023, tweet from Simpson titled, "Sports should be equal and fair," in which he shared his views on the inclusion of transgender athletes in sports. In that video, Simpson was shown sitting in front of the same flowers, with the same shirt on, with the camera at the same angle as the one in the manipulated screenshot, and the same reflection in his glasses. Twitter account July 11, 2023, (Screenshot via Twitter/TheRealOJ32)  Sports should be equal and fair. pic.twitter.com/efsqiDpd7k pic.twitter.com/efsqiDpd7k  O.J. Simpson (@TheRealOJ32) July 11, 2023 July 11, 2023  Simpson, a former professional football player, gained notoriety in the 1990s after a sensational trial in which he was acquitted of the murder of his estranged wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman. In 2008, he was found guilty in a botched robbery and sentenced to more than three decades in prison, of which he served nine years. acquitted 2008 Simpson also produced andactedprofessionally, appearing in "The Naked Gun" movie series, among others. His finances fell under scrutiny upon his 2017 release from prison. Tom Scotto, his friend, told USA Today that Simpson received money from a SAG pension, in addition to his National Football League pension and his personal investments in a retirement fund. According to the Hollywood Reporter, Simpson's SAG pension was protected from the millions of dollars he owed to the families of Brown Simpson and Goldman, after they won a wrongful death lawsuit against him in 1997. acted USA Today Hollywood Reporter won Simpson's acting and producing credits entitled him to SAG membership and he appears to have a SAG pension as well, but the extent of his active participation in union activities and current status is unknown. Regardless, the above screenshot clearly does not show Simpson supporting the actor's strike, rather it was manufactured by altering a separate video and adding a fictional caption. As such, we rate this claim as False. Barco, Mandalit del. "Hollywood Actors Go on Strike, Say It's Time for Studio Execs to 'Wake Up.'" NPR, 13 July 2023. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2023/07/13/1187310535/hollywood-actors-strike-sag-aftra.Accessed 14 July 2023. Gardner, Eriq. "O.J. Simpson's Former Attorney F. Lee Bailey Gets Bad News About His SAG-AFTRA Pensions." The Hollywood Reporter, 4 Oct. 2017, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/oj-simpsons-attorney-f-lee-bailey-gets-bad-news-his-sag-aftra-pensions-1045756/.Accessed 14 July 2023. News, A. B. C. "26 Years Ago, OJ Simpson Was Acquitted: Timeline of His Life and the Sensational Trial." ABC News, https://abcnews.go.com/US/key-moments-oj-simpsons-life/story?id=48724637. Accessed 14 July 2023. "O.J. Simpson | Actor, Producer." IMDb, https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001740/. Accessed 14 July 2023. "O.J. Simpson Acquitted." HISTORY, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/o-j-simpson-acquitted. Accessed 14 July 2023. Peter, Josh. "O.J. Simpson's Finances Will Be Closely Watched If Paroled." USA TODAY, https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2017/07/19/o-j-simpsons-finances-closely-watched-if-paroled/493639001/. Accessed 14 July 2023. Vercammen, Paul. "O.J. Simpson to Focus on 'friends, Family and Golf,' Live in Gated Community after Release." CNN, 29 Sept. 2017, https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/29/us/o-j-simpson-parole-release-road-to-freedom/index.html.Accessed 14 July 2023. What happens when the sitting President of the United States can no longer carry out his duties due to death, resignation, removal from office, or incapacitation?  That was one of the issues addressed by the framers of the U.S. Constitution back in the 18th century, but unfortunately not thoroughly so  ambiguities of wording and unanticipated circumstances have required that the Constitution be amended several times to cover situations not originally foreseen. Even today, some questions about presidential succession and eligibility remain, giving rise to various thought exercises such as the following: thought exercises  Although the particular scenario outlined in the above meme is a hypothetical, we can say that its  description of how to restore to office a President who has been impeached and removed from office would almost certainly fail in real life for practical and/or legal reasons. For openers, let's summarize the process of removing a President from office.   The House Judiciary Committee holds hearings to discuss the charges against the President (similar to a grand jury pondering an indictment), prepares articles of impeachment outlining those charges, and (if a majority of the committee votes to approve the articles), sends them to the full House for debate and vote.  If a majority of the full House votes for impeachment based on one or more of those articles, then the President must stand trial in the Senate.  If two-thirds of the Senate votes to convict at the culmination of that trial, the President is automatically removed from office and, if the Senate so decides, may be barred from holding any high governmental position again. But could the removed President's successor make use of constitutional powers to pardon him and engage a scheme to reinstall him to the presidency by appointing him Vice President?    Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that "Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States."  So if the Senate voted to convict a sitting President and thereby remove him from office, they could also vote to permanently disqualify him from holding federal office again.   However, none of that judgment could be undone by a presidential pardon, because Article II, Section 2 (which establishes the presidential pardon privilege) states that "The President ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."  (If this were not the case, then a sitting President facing impeachment could simply pardon himself and thus avoid any punishment.) What if the Senate voted to remove a President from office but did not also vote to bar him from holding office again?  That's where the practicality part of this exercise kicks in. Let's imagine a President is impeached and removed from office, and the Vice President thereby assumes the presidency.  Now the office of Vice President is vacant and needs to be filled.  Could the just-removed President step into that role? Amendment XXV of the U.S. Constitution specifies that "Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress."  Theoretically, anyone who was  constitutionally eligible to hold office could be nominated for the VP slot.  But how likely is it that the same Congress that just voted overwhelmingly to oust a politician from the highest office in the land would then turn right around and approve appointing that same person to the second-highest office?  We'll go with "not very likely." About the only way this scenario could conceivably play out in real life would be if the following sequence of events took place: 1) A President were impeached and removed from office but not permanently barred from holding office.2) An election that altered the makeup of Congress intervened before a new Vice President could be nominated and approved.3) The results of that election tilted Congress in favor of the recently deposed President.4) The newly seated Congress opted to make one of their first acts of business the audacious re-installation to power of a President who had just been drummed out of office. All of the maneuvering described above would only get the former President as far the vice presidency.  Elevating him back into the position of chief executive would require that the current President be so pliant as to willingly step aside to make room for someone who had just been kicked out of office  an act that would have no obvious upside to it for the recently installed President (given that   achieving the presidency is generally considered the pinnacle of any politician's career).   All in all, it's possible that under an extremely contrived and convoluted sequence of events, a President who had been impeached and removed from office could regain the White House without standing for election again ... but the likelihood of circumstances lining up just right to make that happen are practically zero.   And the presidential power to pardon would be irrelevant to that process. On 13 February 2019, NASA announced that the mission of a robotic rover named Opportunity had come to an end after the device had spent 15 years exploring the surface of Mars: announced One of the most successful and enduring feats of interplanetary exploration, NASA's Opportunity rover mission is at an end after almost 15 years exploring the surface of Mars and helping lay the groundwork for NASA's return to the Red Planet. The Opportunity rover stopped communicating with Earth when a severe Mars-wide dust storm blanketed its location in June 2018. After more than a thousand commands to restore contact, engineers in the Space Flight Operations Facility at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) made their last attempt to revive Opportunity, to no avail. The solar-powered rover's final communication was received June 10. As the online world mourned the loss of the famous Martian explorer, many social media users started sharing a quote that supposedly constituted Oppy's final transmission to NASA: "My battery is low and its getting dark."  This quote quickly made its way around the Internet, shared by celebrities, reporters, and social media influencers. Some people also created tributes to Opportunity that featured the rover's alleged final transmission: influencers   Although many individuals and news outlets cited these words as if they constituted a verbatim reproduction of Opportunity's final transmission, the phrase was not a literal reproduction of the robotic rover's last statement. news outlets The quote originated with a Twitter thread about Oppy's demise by posted by KPCC science reporter Jacob Margolis. At one point, Margolis said the rover's final transmission "basically" translated as "my battery is low and it's getting dark": thread basically   This quote quickly escaped the context of Margolis' Twitter thread, however, and started to circulate as if he were relaying a verbatim message from the Mars rover. On 16 February 2019, Margolis published an article on The LAist website explaining how his words came to be taken out of context: The LAist My tweet is an interpretation of what two scientists from the Mars Exploration Rover Mission told me. Deputy Project Scientist Abigail Fraeman spoke about what it was like when they realized the June [2018] dust storm was going to be particularly bad, and that Oppy's life was in danger. They told it to conserve energy. "It's hard, because you know [the storm's] coming ... but there's nothing you can do to stop it," Fraeman said. "By Thursday, we knew that it was bad. And then by Friday, we knew it was really bad, but there was nothing we could do but watch. And then it was Sunday, we actually got a communication from the rover and we were shocked," she said. "It basically said we had no power left, and that was the last time we heard from it." John Callas, the project manager, offered another poignant detail about the final communication with Oppy: "It also told us the skies were incredibly dark, to the point where no sunlight gets through. It's night time during the day." "We were hopeful that the rover could ride it out. That the rover would hunker down, and then when the storm cleared, the rover would charge back up," he said. "That didn't happen. At least it didn't tell us that it happened. So, we don't know." When NASA announced the completion of Opportunity's mission in February 2019, the Mars rover hadn't communicated with the space agency since the previous June. The solar-powered Opportunity was low on power when one of the largest dust storms observed on Mars engulfed the planet and, essentially, turned "day into night," as the Planetary Society wrote:  communicated Planetary Society On June 20th, NASA announced the storm had gone global. To be more accurate, it evolved into a planetary-encircling dust event (PEDE), lofting enough dust into the atmosphere to completely blanket the planet and block out the Sun. In other words, the Red Planet and most all its features were hidden from most orbiting instruments beneath an opaque, beige dust cloud. The atmospheric scientists taking measurements with instruments on the orbiters were soon blocked out. Oppy sent its final message from the surface of Mars on 10 June 2018: final message Opportunity downlinked what would turn out to be her final message from Mars on June 10, 2018. The bare bones contents of that missive informed her crew that a monster dust storm was lifting dust all around Endeavour Crater and was turning day into night there. Minutes later, the solar-powered robot field geologist presumably shut down and went into a kind of hibernation mode to wait out the storm. NASA attempted to communicate with Opportunity many times after the storm passed, but the rover never responded:  Margolis, Jacob.  "How a Tweet About The Mars Rover Dying Blew Up on the Internet and Made People Cry."
  The LAist.  16 February 2019. Rayl, A.J.S.  "The Mars Exploration Rovers Update: Opportunity Sleeps as Storm Chasers Study Planet-Encircling Dust Cloud."
  Planetary Society.  4 July 2018. Rayl, A.J.S.  "The Mars Exploration Rovers Update Special Report: NASA Declares Opportunity and MER Mission Complete."
  Planetary Society.  14 February 2019. NASA.  "NASA's Opportunity Rover Mission on Mars Comes to End."
  13 February 2019.