Don't Buy Gas on April 15
Claim:  Participating in one-day boycott of gasoline on 15 April will help lower gasoline prices.  Examples:  [Collected on the Internet, March 2012] Don't pump gas on April 15, 2012. KEEP SENDING THIS.  Let's all try this, wonderful if it helps. I'll do it!  If running low, just get your gas the day before on April 14 or the day after on April 16. Every little bit helps. In April 1997, there was a "gas out" conducted nationwide in protest of gas prices. Gasoline prices dropped 30 cents a gallon overnight. On April 15th 2011, all internet users are to not go to a gas station in protest of high gas prices. Gas is now over $1.20 a liter/$3.87 is most places. If all users did not go to the pump on the 15th, it would take $2,292,000,000.00 (that's almost 3 BILLION) out of the oil companies pockets for just one day, so please do not go to the gas station on April 15th and let's try to put a dent in the Middle Eastern oil industry for at least one day.  [Collected on the Internet, 2007] DO NOT PUMP GAS ON MAY 15TH... On May 15th all myspace members are to not go to the gas station in protest high gas prices. Gas is now over $3.00 a gallon in most places. There are 72,110,073 members currently on the network, and the average car takes about 20 to 30 dollars to fill up. If all myspace members did not go to the pump on the 15th it would take $2,163,302,190.00 out of the oil companys pockets for just one day, so please do not go to the gas station on May 15th and lets try to put a dent in the oil industry for at least one day. If you agree (which I cant see why you wouldnt) repost this bulletin repost it with "Don't pump gas on May 15th, 2007"    [Collected on the Internet, 2006] No Gas on May 15th On May 15th all myspace members are to not go to the gas station in protest high gas prices. Gas is now over $3.00 a gallon in most places. There are 72,110,073 members currently on the network, and the average car takes about 20 to 30 dollars to fill up. If all myspace members did not go to the pump on the 15th it would take $2,163,302,190.00 out of the oil companys pockets for just one day, so please do not go to the gas station on May 15th and lets try to put a dent in the oil industry for at least one day..  [Collected on the Internet, 2005] IT HAS BEEN CALCULATED THAT IF EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA DID NOT PURCHASE A DROP OF GASOLINE FOR ONE DAY AND ALL AT THE SAME TIME, THE OIL COMPANIES WOULD CHOKE ON THEIR STOCKPILES. AT THE SAME TIME IT WOULD HIT THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY WITH A NET LOSS OF OVER 4.6 BILLION DOLLARS WHICH AFFECTS THE BOTTOM LINES OF THE OIL COMPANIES. THEREFORE SEPTEMBER 1st  HAS BEEN FORMALLY DECLARED "STICK IT UP THEIR BEHIND " DAY AND THE PEOPLE OF THESE TWO NATIONS SHOULD NOT BUY A SINGLE DROP OF GASOLINE THAT DAY. THE ONLY WAY THIS CAN BE DONE IS IF YOU FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN AND AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN TO GET THE WORD OUT. WAITING ON THE GOVERNMENT TO STEP IN AND CONTROL THE PRICES IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.  WHAT HAPPENED TO THE REDUCTION AND CONTROL IN PRICES THAT THE ARAB NATIONS PROMISED TWO WEEKS AGO? REMEMBER ONE THING, NOT ONLY IS THE PRICE OF GASOLINE GOING UP BUT AT THE SAME TIME AIRLINES ARE FORCED TO RAISE THEIR PRICES, TRUCKING COMPANIES ARE FORCED TO RAISE THEIR PRICES WHICH EFFECTS PRICES ON EVERYTHING THAT IS SHIPPED.  THINGS LIKE FOOD, CLOTHING, BUILDING MATERIALS, MEDICAL SUPPLIES ETC.  WHO PAYS IN THE END?  WE DO! WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE.  IF THEY DON'T GET THE MESSAGE AFTER ONE DAY, WE WILL DO IT AGAIN AND AGAIN. SO DO YOUR PART AND SPREAD THE WORD.  FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW.  MARK YOUR CALENDARS AND MAKE SEPTEMBER 1ST A DAY THAT THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA  SAY "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH"  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] IT HAS BEEN CALCULATED THAT IF EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES DID NOT PURCHASE A DROP OF GASOLINE FOR ONE DAY AND ALL AT THE SAME TIME, THE OIL COMPANIES WOULD CHOKE ON THEIR STOCKPILES. AT THE SAME TIME IT WOULD HIT THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY WITH A NET LOSS OF OVER 4.6 BILLION DOLLARS WHICH AFFECTS THE BOTTOM LINES OF THE OIL COMPANIES. THEREFORE MAY 19TH HAS BEEN FORMALLY DECLARED "STICK IT UP THEIR BEHINDS DAY" AND THE PEOPLE OF THIS NATION SHOULD NOT BUY A SINGLE DROP OF GASOLINE THAT DAY. THE ONLY WAY THIS CAN BE DONE IS IF YOU FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN AND AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN TO GET THE WORD OUT. WAITING ON THIS ADMIINSTRATION TO STEP IN AND CONTROL THE PRICES IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE REDUCTION AND CONTROL IN PRICES THAT THE ARAB NATIONS PROMISED TWO WEEKS AGO? REMEMBER ONE THING, NOT ONLY IS THE PRICE OF GASOLINE GOING UP BUT AT THE SAME TIME AIRLINES ARE FORCED TO RAISE THEIR PRICES, TRUCKING COMPANIES ARE FORCED TO RAISE THEIR PRICES WHICH EFFECTS PRICES ON EVERYTHING THAT IS SHIPPED. THINGS LIKE FOOD, CLOTHING, BUILDING MATERIALS, MEDICAL SUPPLIES ETC. WHO PAYS IN THE END? WE DO! WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. IF THEY DON'T GET THE MESSAGE AFTER ONE DAY, WE WILL DO IT AGAIN AND AGAIN.  SO DO YOUR PART AND SPREAD THE WORD. FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW. MARK YOUR CALENDARS AND MAKE MAY 19TH A DAY THAT THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES SAY "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH"  [Collected on the Internet, 2000] Last year on April 30, 1999, a gas out was staged across Canada and the U.S. to bring the price of gas down, and it worked. It's time to do something about it again. Only this time lets make it for three days instead of just one. The so-called oil cartel decided to slow production to drive up gasoline prices. Lets see how many CanadianAmerican people we can get to ban together for a three day period in April, NOT TO BUY ANY GASOLINE, during those three days. LET'S HAVE A GAS OUT. Do not buy any gasoline from APRIL 7, 2000, THROUGH APRIL 9, 2000. Buy what you need before the dates listed above, or after, but try not to buy any during the GAS OUT. If you want to help, just send this to everyone you know and ask  them to do the same. We brought the prices down once before, and we can do it again. Come on North America lets stand together. WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Even if you receive this 100 times keep passing it around, this way you know everyone is being informed and no one will forget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Origins:  The above-quoted pieces advocating one-day gasoline boycotts are proof that some bad ideas never go away; they just keep getting recycled year after year. This year's e-mail (proposing a one-day "gas out" on 15 April) is yet another recasting of similar messages that have been circulating since 1999.  All of them are reminders that "protest" schemes that don't cost the participants any inconvenience, hardship, or money remain the most popular, despite their ineffectiveness.  A one-day "gas out" was proposed in 1999, and a three-day-long event was called for in 2000, but both drew little active participation and had no real effect on retail gasoline prices.   The recycling of the same campaign in subsequent years hasn't drawn enough interest to even be considered newsworthy. The premise behind all these messages is inherently flawed, because consumers' not buying gasoline on one particular day doesn't affect oil companies at all.  The "gas out" scheme doesn't call upon people to use less gasoline, but simply to shift their date of purchase and buy gas a day earlier or later than they usually would  The very same amount of gasoline is sold either way, so oil companies don't lose any money.  By definition, a boycott involves the doing without of something, with the renunciation of the boycotted product held up as tangible proof to those who supply the commodity that consumers are prepared to do without it unless changes are made. What the "gas out" calls for isn't consumers' swearing off using or buying gasoline, even for a short time, but simply shifting their purchases by a couple of days at most. Because the "gas out" doesn't call on consumers to make a sacrifice by actually giving up something, the threat it poses is a hollow one.  Not buying gas on a designated day may make people feel a bit better about things by providing them a chance to vent their anger at higher gasoline prices, but the action won't have any real impact on retail prices. An effective protest would involve something like organizing people to forswear the use of their cars on specified days, an act that could effectively demonstrate the reality of the threat that if gasoline prices stayed high, American consumers were prepared to move to carpooling and public transportation for the long term. Simply changing the day one buys gas, however, imparts no such threat, because nothing is being done without. Moreover, the primary potential effect of the type of boycott proposed in the "gas out" messages is to hurt those at the very end of the oil-to-gasoline chain: the independent service station operators, who have the least say in setting gasoline prices. (Independents are at the mercy of a very volatile oil market and operate on thin profit margins, and even a single day's disruption of supply or demand can wipe out many days' worth of hard-earned profits.)  As such, the "gas out" is a punch on the nose delivered to the wrong person. Either apathy or an outbreak of common sense has made previous "gas outs" non-events with very low levels of participation, as documented by these snippets of news accounts from across North America: Friday's gasoline boycott was an effort that sputtered, coughed, then died.  Motorists continued to fill up gas-guzzling sport-utility vehicles and trucks alongside smaller vehicles despite a one-day protest aimed to pressure oil companies to lower gas prices.  Although a gasoline boycott that began as an electronic mail campaign kept some drivers nationwide away from the pump, dealers say they saw little, if any, effect on their traffic.  In Seattle, there were so many cars waiting to get into [a] Texaco station ... yesterday afternoon that it caused a backup five cars deep into [the] right-hand lane.  Reports indicated few motorists paid attention to a nationwide boycott touted initially by Internet e-mail and later by word of mouth.  A planned nationwide boycott protesting the high price of gasoline didn't have much effect on local gas stations.  "We were expecting something substantial," said Mark Johnson, the owner of a Chevron station. "We haven't really noticed much of a difference."  Irving stations in sunny Halifax said the boycott had no effect on business. "It's been busy as a bugger here," said Bruce Riley, manager of one station. "We haven't been busier in the last two weeks," added the manager at another Halifax outlet.  Gas stations [in Ottawa] reported "busier than ever" conditions at the pumps on the day of The Great Internet Gas-Out. Gasoline is a fungible, global commodity, its price subject to the ordinary forces of supply and demand.  No amount of consumer gimmickry and showmanship will lower its price in the long run; only a significant, ongoing reduction in demand will accomplish that goal.  Unfortunately, for many people achieving that goal would mean cutting down on their driving or opting for less desirable economy cars over less fuel-efficient models, solutions they find unappealing. An event like a "gas out" can sometimes do some good by calling attention to a cause and sending a message.  In this case, though, the only message being sent is: "We consumers are so desperate for gasoline that we can't even do without it for a few days to demonstrate our dissatisfaction with its cost." What supplier is going to respond to a message like that by lowering its prices?  Those who really want to send a "message" to oil suppliers should try not buying any gasoline for several months in a row. Other articles about gasoline prices:      Petition to President Bush      Call to Boycott Particular Suppliers to Cut Off Funding of Terrorists     Call to Spurn Gasoline from Particular Suppliers to Bring Price Down  Last updated:  11 March 2013    Deibel, Mary.  "Web-Inspired 'Gas Out' Won't Work, Experts Say."   The [Albany] Times Union.  27 April 1999  (p. A2).     De Marcol, Donna.  "High Prices Fuel Gas Boycott; Locally, Impact Minimal."   The Washington Times.  1 May 1999  (p. C11).     Heaster, Jerry.  "Gasoline Protest Runs on Empty."   The Kansas City Star.  30 April 1999  (p. C1).     Howe, Kenneth.  "Internet-Fueled Gas Boycott Fizzles Around Bay Area."   The San Francisco Chronicle.  1 May 1999  (p. A1).     Sands, Aaron.  "Net-Fuelled Protest Runs Out of Gas."   The Ottawa Sun.  1 May 1999  (p. A4).     Simmons, Cindy.  "For Oregonians, Necessity Takes Precedence Over Protest at the Pump."   Associated Press.  1 May 1999.     Surman, Matt.  "Gas Boycott Runs on Empty; Stations Report No Change."   Los Angeles Times.  1 May 1999  (p. B6).     Associated Press.  "Arizonans Largely Ignore 'Gas Out.'"   1 May 1999.     Calgary Herald.  "Most Motorists Ignore North American Gas Boycott."   1 May 1999  (p. E5).     Indianapolis Business Journal.  "Misguided 'Gas Out' Won't Pay at Pump."   3 May 1999  (p. B9).     Seattle Post-Intelligencer.  "National Boycott Doesn't Slow Gas Flowing at Pumps."   1 May 1999  (p. B3).     The Toronto Star.  "Gas Boycott Sputters."   1 May 1999.
How would you feel if you had qualified for a performance bonus at your job, but nobody recognized you'd met your goal until half a century later? Just ask former baseball pro Jim Gentile. Jim Gentile was a slugging first baseman of the 1950s who had the misfortune of being signed to the Dodgers organization at a time when perennial all-star Gil Hodges had a lock on the first base position. Gentile spent several years in the Dodgers' minor league system with little opportunity to play for the big club until he was finally traded to the Baltimore Orioles after the 1959 season. Jim Gentile Gil Hodges Gentile had a few solid seasons as a full-time player in Baltimore, including a monster year in 1961 when he hit .302 with 46 home runs and 141 RBI. Unfortunately for Gentile, a few other players had monster years in 1961 as well, so he didn't lead the league in any offensive category: He was fifth in batting average (far behind Norm Cash's impressive .361), finished third in the home run race behind the Yankees' Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle (the former of whom broke Babe Ruth's single-season home run record that year with 61), and was one RBI shy of Maris' league-leading total of 142.  Brooklyn Dodger Gil Hodges poses for a portrait after clubbing four home runs in a game in 1950.  But ... thirty-four years later, in 1995, a researcher discovered that Maris had erroneously been credited with an extra RBI, which meant that Gentile had actually tied for the American League lead in that category in 1961: researcher discovered Ron Rakowski, a member of the Society for American Baseball Research, maintains that Maris mistakenly was credited with an extra RBI July 5 against the Cleveland Indians at Yankee Stadium. Therefore, Rakowski says, Gentile and Maris should be co-leaders at 141. In the third inning, with Tony Kubek on first, Maris singled to right. Third baseman Bubba Phillips took the throw from Willie Kirkland, then threw to first trying to catch Maris rounding the base. Phillips' throw went into the seats, allowing Kubek to score. Maris later hit a bases-empty homer, but the official scorer reported two RBIs for him, one on Phillips' error that enabled Kubek to score. Reached for comment, Gentile recognized that Major League Baseball doesn't necessarily adjust its record books when statistical discrepancies are found many years after the fact. And, he wryly noted, he might have received an extra $5,000 in pay if the correct RBI totals had been reported back in 1961: "After 34 years, no one is likely to change it," said Gentile, who lives in Edmond, Okla., and helps conduct the Orioles Fantasy Camp as well as baseball camps for youngsters in Oklahoma. "Well, maybe it's worth an asterisk." "I wish I'd known that then," said Gentile, whose 141 are an Orioles record. "The next winter, [general manager] Lee MacPhail said if I had led the league in RBIs, that alone would have been worth an extra $5,000." Laughing, Gentile added, "Maybe I should write the Orioles a letter." But ... another fifteen years later, in 2010, the corrected statistic was finally recognized, and Gentile became the official American League co-leader in RBI for 1961. corrected statistic was finally recognized Gentile received another boost in August 2010, when -- nearly fifty years late -- the Orioles came through and presented him with a check for $5,000 in recognition of his newfound status: presented him with a check for $5,000 It took almost 50 years, and there was no interest added. But a promise is a promise, and Jim Gentile finally got his $5,000 bonus from the Baltimore Orioles. The Orioles honored Gentile, now 76, for his achievement before their game at Camden Yards on [Aug. 6]. Andy MacPhail, the Orioles president of baseball operations whose father made that long-ago promise, presented him with a $5,000 check. It should be noted that no "promise" had actually been made to Gentile back in 1961, nor did his contract for that year include any clause calling for payment of a $5,000 bonus if he led the league in RBI. According to Gentile, the Orioles' general manager merely quipped to him during the next year's salary negotiations that Gentile's being the league leader in the RBI category might have prompted the club to offer him a somewhat higher salary for 1962. Nonetheless, Gentile didn't appear to have fared too badly in the pay department. According to a Feb. 14, 1962, report in The Sporting News, Gentile's 1962 salary of $30,000 was double his 1961 figure. Brown, Doug.  "Diamond Jim Hit $$ Jackpot with New Oriole Pact."
  The Sporting News.  14 February 1962.
 Brown, Doug.  '61 RBI Race Resumes: Researcher Says O's Gentile Tied Maris at 141."
  The Baltimore Sun.  26 July 1995.
 Kepner, Tyler.  "For Jim Gentile, A Long-Awaited Bonus."
  The New York Times.  6 August 2010. On 5 March 2019, a conspiracy-minded Twitter account shared a video purporting to be from the site of a construction project funded by West Virginia taxpayer money for the purpose of housing 321 Syrian refugees. The video also claimed this was being done at the expense of regular Americans who, the man claims, were being pushed into substandard housing. He asserted that the area he was standing in will be a sharia zone, and no non-Muslims will be allowed to enter: a video  Several factual problems exist with assertions in this video. Chief among them is the fact that this video shows the Littlepage Terrace housing project, a low-income, housing tax-credit property allocated through the West Virginia Housing Development Fund, which houses zero Syrian refugees and many regular Americans. Several lines of evidence support this conclusion. First, someone who works next to the project refers to it as Littlepage: Littlepage Terrace   Second, a wider, composite view of the mans video shows clearly identifiable markers of the Littlepage housing complex, including a tell-tale smokestack and buildings that exactly match the structures built at Littlepage:   For comparison, heres video shot at Littlepage:  Third, Mark Taylor, the chief executive officer of Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority, which works with the Littlepage Terrace project, confirmed to us by email that the suspect video was taken at that site during renovations that likely occurred in May 2017. He also confirmed to us that the community houses no Syrian refugees. Another significant oversight in the tweeted narrative is that the entire state of West Virginia has taken in far less than 321 Syrian refugees in total. In 2016, the year the United States took in the largest number of Syrian refugees, West Virginia resettled only five of them in their state. On 1 February 2017, the Trump Administration announced Executive Order 13769, commonly referred to as the travel ban," which indefinitely suspended the admission of Syrian refugees to the United States. In 2017, West Virginia took in 13 refugees, but these individuals were not necessarily Syrian. largest number only five travel ban 13 refugees It is true that Littlepage was torn down and rebuilt, but that decision had nothing to do with refugee housing. Instead, the renovations aimed to reduce crime and revitalize the area, as reported by West Virginias WCHS television station in 2016: reported The Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority is now on the last phase of revitalizing three housing projects. Similar to Orchard Manor and Washington Manor, Littlepage Terrace will be demolished and rebuilt as two-story town homes.  This housing project was built nearly 80 years ago with no air conditioning and poor visibility. Now it is simply not a secure living space.  The goal for these new developments is to reduce crime and revitalize the area. Because the housing complex displayed was not built for Syrian refugees, and because the state has taken virtually no Syrian refugees at all, we rank the claims made in this video as aggressively and demonstrably false. Charleston-Kanawha Housing.  Developments - Littlepage Terrace."
  Accessed 14 March 2019. Zong, Jie, and Jeanne Batalova.  Syrian Refugees in the United States
  Migration Policy Institute.  17 January 2017. Beck, Erin.  Few Syrian Refugees Resettle in WV, At Least for Now.
  Charleston Gazette-Mail.  2 September 2016. Whitehouse.gov.  Executive Order Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States."
  27 January 2017. U.S. Department of State.  Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2019."
  24 September 2018. Gunderson, Kaela.  Residents, Housing Officials Hope Littlepage Terrace Project Will Boost Safety.
  WCHS/WCAH ABC 8.  3 August 2016. Since at least January 2021, actor Anthony Hopkins was featured in an online advertisement about the height of Hollywood celebrity men. The ad read: "Some of the Shortest Men in Hollywood Today."   Readers who clicked the online ad were led to a 95-page story on Cleverst.com. Its headline read: "These Short Male Celebrities Remind Us That Height Doesn't Matter In Hollywood." The lengthy article began with a picture of actor Dave Franco, who is purported to be 5 feet 7. We clicked "next page" 95 times until we realized we had clicked "next article" at the end. Hopkins didn't even show up in the story. Anthony Hopkins' height is listed at 5 feet 9 on various sources, including on his IMDb page. The actor is anything but "short." his IMDb page Hopkins is perhaps best known for his work in the 1991 classic, "The Silence of the Lambs." He won the best actor Oscar for playing the role of the terrifying cannibal, Hannibal Lecter. The long story of "short male celebrities" also featured a 6-feet-tall Vin Diesel, a 5 feet 10 Jason Statham, and 5 feet 9 actors Robert Downey Jr. and Tom Hardy. This was hardly a list of "some of the shortest men in Hollywood today." The Cleverst.com story appeared to be a strategy known as advertising "arbitrage." The goal was to make more money on ads that were displayed on all 95 pages than it cost to display the original Hopkins clickbait picture. The Hopkins photograph lured the readers. Readers then clicked "next page" in a search for Hopkins, who never appeared. The business and technology blog Margins defined "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." They also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." Margins The same strategy employed for Hopkins' height was used by other advertisers in the past who placed an ad about Pierce Brosnan's net worth. The ad claimed that "Pierce Brosnan's final net worth left his family in tears." Not only was Pierce Brosnan still alive, but he also did not appear in the lengthy slideshow story that resulted. Pierce Brosnan's net worth 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 Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here In mid-December 2020, a copy-pasted ("copypasta") meme spread on social media platforms warning "patriots" that U.S. President Donald Trump was about to "tactically" implement elements of an executive order on election security signed in 2018, telling them to have weapons "at the ready":   copypasta The incendiary meme appears to reference an executive order signed by Trump on Sept. 12, 2018, ahead of the midterm elections. The meme claimed that Trump was to implement parts of the order at some point between Dec. 18 and Dec. 24, 2020. executive order Here is a portion of the text: This will freeze the money and assets of people and entities to include Facebook, Twitter, the Fake News Corp, AND Chinese U.S. financial accounts. Be prepared to assist the National Guard and the military commands in defense of Our nation. Make sure that you have your weapons at the ready. But DO NOT interfere with the operations of the military. During this time, local law enforcement will have no authority. So, assemble small Patriot teams to patrol and secure your own and surrounding neighbors Trump's 2018 executive order has nothing to do with military or National Guard deployment domestically, nor does it mention the broad suspension of financial assets of social media platforms and "Chinese U.S. financial accounts." The meme appears to actually be referencing extreme calls by some of Trump's supporters, echoing his false claims that the November 2020 election was beset by mass-scale fraud and advocating that Trump impose martial law in response. extreme calls The 2018 executive order  signed less than a month before the 2018 midterm elections  was meant as a deterrent against foreign election interference. The order stated that the Trump administration was ready to implement sanctions against any foreign entity that interfered in the election process. stated It's noteworthy that the order was signed ahead of the first national election since 2016, during which the Russian government interfered in an effort to sow chaos in the U.S. and help Trump's electoral efforts. Trump was under political pressure at that time to stem similar interference in 2018. effort pressure Notably, Facebook and Twitter are American companies, not foreign entities. It's unclear to us what exactly "Fake News Corp" refers to, but unsurprisingly, no such company exists. Sanctions can't be imposed on a fictional entity. The 2018 executive order relies on various department heads to make determinations about foreign election interference and potential sanctions  in other words, it doesn't give Trump unilateral authority to take action. For example, it gives the director of national intelligence 45 days to determine whether foreign interference in an election had occurred, at which point the assessment must be delivered to "the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security." After further consultation between these department heads, the executive order then leaves the secretary of treasury, who is currently Steve Mnuchin, to lead in the implementation of economic sanctions. The departments of Treasury and State would then assess whether additional sanctions were necessary and present their findings to the White House. The copypasta meme appears to be inflammatory fear mongering that plays on a disinformation campaign carried out by Trump and his supporters that the election was stolen by way of a massive-fraud conspiracy. Trump's own U.S. Department of Homeland Security debunked this conspiracy theory by stating that the November 2020 election was in fact "the most secure in American history." stating 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 Since the start of the COVID-19 coronavirus in the United States in March 2020, a scam has been circulating on the internet falsely informing viewers that streaming giant Netflix was offering a free one-year subscription due to the pandemic. scam Here's an example of the scam we found circulating on Twitter, with the user's name cropped out for privacy reasons:   The text of the scam read, "Due to the CoronaVirus pandemic worldwide, Netflix is giving some free pass for their platform during the period of isolation. Run on the site cause it will end quick!" The post also included a link, which we cropped out because it is likely a phishing site. phishing Netflix is making no such offer, and in fact as of October 2020, it no longer even offered temporary free trials for potential subscribers. no longer In other Netflix-related scams, members of the public reported receiving emails and text messages from scammers posing as Netflix representatives, telling them they need to update their accounts. The company stated it wouldn't seek personal information, like banking or credit card numbers, in texts or emails. scams stated Claim:   Photograph shows U.S. Air Force jets celebrating a Supreme Court ruling regarding the Defense of Marriage Act.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, June 2013] THIS PICTURE IS CIRCULATING ON FACEBOOK, STATING THAT THE US AIR FORCE SENT UP THESE JETS WITH COLORED SMOKE TO SYMBOLIZE THE GAY PRIDE FLAG, AND CELEBRATE MARRIAGE EQUALITY AS DEFINED BY THE SUPREME COURT TODAY 26 JUNE 2013. COLORS ARE ALL WRONG, AND IT LOOKS PHOTOSHOPPED. WOULD LOVE FOR IT TO BE REAL, BUT DONT WANT TO REPOST ANYTHING MISLEADING.  Origins:  On 26 June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in the case of United States v. Windsor which struck down a section of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that strictly defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, thereby paving the way for same-sex couples who are legally married to access numerous federal privileges  and programs that use marital status as a criterion for eligibility (such as Social Security  survivors' benefits and the ability to file joint tax returns). Shortly afterwards, the photograph displayed above was widely circulated in social media with claims that it pictured U.S. Air Force jets participating in a celebration of the DOMA ruling, the colored smoke trails behind them symbolizing the rainbow of colors that became the standard symbol of the gay community in the 1970s.  However, this image has nothing to do with a purported celebration of the DOMA ruling by the U.S. Air Force, as this same picture has been widely reproduced on numerous web sites all over the world since well before June 2013.  The source of the original (as displayed on flickr) appears to bea photograph taken at the Royal International Air Tattoo (RIAT) Airshow in  Fairford, Gloucestershire (UK), on 17 July 2010. flickr RIAT Last updated:  27 June 2013 In late October 2023, the latest iteration of iCloud storage scam email messages circulated in users' inboxes. The subject line of one message that we reviewed read, "LAST ALERT: ALL YOUR PHOTOS WILL BE DELETED!" The message came from a dubious email address that did not end in @apple.com or @icloud.com. The email address showed the display name of "iCloud Storage."  The message began as follows: iCloudFailed to attempt payment when renewing yourCloud storage subscription0 GB 48.9GB /50 GB We failed to renew your iCloud storageYour photos and videos will be deleted!! Your payment method has expired: Update your payment information!If you don't have enough iCloud space, you can upgrade storage plan The link in the message led to a page on menoshold.com, a scam website without a homepage. The page read as follows: Your iCloud Storage Is Full! Your photos, videos, files and private data will be lost. As part of our loyalty program, you can receive an additional 50GB storage by paying $1.95 one time only before all the files are deleted. Answer the following 3 simple questions to claim your special offer now. After filling out a brief survey, the page then displayed the following text: You will be redirected to the next page to claim the 50GB iCloud Storage with $1.95 only. Fill in your basic information and pay $1.95 with credit card or debit card. The 50GB iCloud storage will be added to your current device. The scam then led to a final page on hyperimmunizing.com, also a scam website with no homepage. On the page, we noted that the terms and conditions indicated the entire ruse was a hidden subscription scam, meaning that scammers were attempting to fool users into signing up for recurring monthly fees for services they did not choose. The terms did not mention a specific monthly cost or the types of services that would be provided, but did say at least some users would be "automatically billed every thirty (30) days to the credit card you provided." For readers who might be looking for customer support information, the hyperimmunizing.com website showed the phone number (833) 282-4266 and the email address support@bigprizestoday.com. A representative reached by the phone number only told Snopes that they were a third-party company that was located in Southeast Asia and that they provide services for U.S.-based firms. We advise users who submitted their credit card information to contact their credit card companies to alert them of this activity. If iCloud users have questions for Apple about their storage subscriptions, we recommend visiting the official website for iCloud Support. Apple also published a page about how to recognize scams that impersonate the company. the official website for iCloud Support page Recognize and Avoid Phishing Messages, Phony Support Calls, and Other Scams. Apple Support, https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204759. Claim:  Mattel's new Hello Barbie toy will record and transmit children's conversations.  Example:  [Collected via e-mail, March 2015] I just read an article (sent by Campaign for a Commercial-FreeChildhood) about a new Barbie Doll made by Mattel that is sent to hitmarkets this fall.  This doll records the child's conversations, transmitsthem to Mattel's technology partner "Toy Talk" and they can then use thatinfo..........this all sounds so far out!  ?   Origins:  On 14 February 2015, Mattel introduced a new Barbie model at the New York Toy Fair. In initial media reports, Hello Barbie was simply described as an innovation based upon feedback from young customers who wished to interact with their beloved Barbie dolls, and one of a number of planned interactive toys from Mattel: "The number one request we hear from girls around the world is that they want to have a conversation with Barbie. Now, for the first time ever, Barbie can have a two-way conversation," said a spokeswoman for Mattel. The Hello Barbie will be able to play interactive games and tell stories and jokes. A dinosaur, connected to one of the world's cleverest machines, is also being developedIt will also listen to the child's conversation and adapt to it over time  so, for instance, if a child mentions that they like to dance, the doll may refer to this in a future chat. The doll requires a wi-fi connection and can provide an hour's worth of playtime when fully charged. On 15 February 2015, video footage from the New York Toy Fair that demonstrated how Hello Barbie worked was posted on YouTube:  Interest in Hello Barbie waned until 11 March 2015, when the group Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) published a petition that called upon Mattel to cancel the doll's production based upon the notion that the toy would be recording children's conversations and transmitting them to Mattel: petition Imagine your children playing with a doll that records everything they say (and other nearby conversations) and transmits it all to a corporation which analyzes every word to learn "all of [your child's] likes and dislikes." That's exactly what Mattel's eavesdropping "Hello Barbie" does. Unless we take action, it will be in toy stores this autumn. Kids using "Hello Barbie"' won't only be talking to a doll, they'll be talking directly to a toy conglomerate whose only interest in them is financial. It's creepy- and creates a host of dangers for children and families. Please join CCFC in demanding that Mattel halt marketing and production of "Hello Barbie." By Mattel's own description, Hello Barbie will record and process portions of ambient conversation. However, the petition ascribed a number of additional functions to Hello Barbie which have not been confirmed, such as analysis of captured audio for marketing purposes. While the technology involved alarmed many consumers once the petition began to circulate, it didn't differ meaningfully from the functionality of smart TVs or other popular interactive gadgetry such as Apple's Siri virtual assistant. (iPads and iPhones are not infrequently used by small children despite their similar ability to record and transmit ambient conversation to a third party.) smart TVs ToyTalk, the company that partnered with Mattel to produce Hello Barbie, attempted to assuage parental fears about the new product: In an interview, ToyTalk chief executive Oren Jacob stressed that the audio files the doll collects will be used only to improve the product, including helping it build better speech recognition models for children. "The data is never used for anything to do with marketing or publicity or any of that stuff. Not at all," Jacob said. While it's true that Hello Barbie can record and transmit household conversations, the same could be said for nearly every smartphone, almost all newer televisions, and a number of other personal gadgets. Hello Barbie's interactivity may have alarmed some parents, but it is similar to voice recognition features included on many popular technological devices and by itself presents no more risk or exposure than an iPad or a smart TV.   Last updated:  12 March 2015    "Barbie Doll Will Be Internet Connected to Chat to Kids"   BBC News.  17 February 2015. High-speed rail has wedged itself into the 2018 campaign for California governor, splitting the current top two Democrats in the race. Former Los Angeles MayorAntonio Villaraigosarecently claimed Lt. Gov.Gavin Newsomthe frontrunner in the racehas essentially flip-flopped in his support for the states controversial and costly rail project. Heres what Villaraigosa told theSacramento Beeon Sept. 20, 2017: Newsom was for it, before hes against it, and then hes for it again. He added that Newsom was revising his positions when the winds blow in his direction. Given the key decisions Californias next governor will need to make on high-speed rail, we wanted to know whether Newsom has really shifted this much in his support for the massive project. We hopped aboard for a fact-check. Background on the bullet train In 2008, California voters approved a nearly $10 billion bond to jump-start the development of a high-speed rail network. Plans called for trains to zip across the state at 200 miles per hour, initially connecting San Francisco to Los Angeles and eventually extending the system to Sacramento and San Diego. Cost estimates for the project, however, have see-sawed from an initial $33 billion to $98 billion to $64 billion. The project has also fallen far behind schedule with construction limited to a small segment in the Central Valley. We asked Villaraigosas campaign for evidence of Newsoms shifting positions. As examples of his initial support, it pointed to news articles showing Newsom backing the 2008 bond measure. The campaign then cited a2014 radio interviewthat it says proves Newsom opposed the project. Finally, it cited articles from October 2016 in which the lieutenant governor again pledged his support. We absolutely need this, Newsom said of high-speed rail in a2007Mercury-Newsarticle. In February 2014, however, Newsom was asked by conservative radio host Ben Shapiro:Are you pro or against the train, especially now that the California public, which approved the train in the first place, has reneged and no longer likes the train? Newsom responded:I think Im where the public was and is. Apoll in September 2013found 52 percent of Californians wanted the rail project stopped and 51 percent felt it was a waste of money. Newsom went on to tell Shapiro:We dont have the federal dollars we were hoping for ... the private sector hasnt stepped up. Shapiro then asked:If you had your druthers, Gavin, would you kill the thing? Newsom responded:I would take the dollars and redirect it to other, more pressing infrastructure needs. I am not the only Democrat that feels this way. I gotta tell you, I am one of the few that just said it publicly. Most are now saying it privately. This exchange gave many the impression Newsom had backed away from the project. Newsom did not clarify in the interview what kind of funds should be redirected. In October 2016, Newsom told the Sacramento Press Club that he would 100 percent seek a solid funding source for the train project if he's elected governor in 2018. TheAssociated Presstook that to mean he again supported the project. AMarch 2017 pollfound Californians remain divided over high-speed rail, with 48 percent favoring the project and 46 percent opposed. The survey added that 66 percent say they would favor high-speed rail if it cost less than the current estimate of $64 billion over the next 20 years. In this Feb. 26, 2016, file photo, the supports for a 1,600-foot-viaduct to carry high-speed rail trains across the Fresno River are seen under construction near Madera, Calif. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File) Newsoms response Dan Newman, Newsoms campaign spokesman, described Villaraigosas claim about shifting positions this way: The statement is extremely misleading at best, he said in an email. Villaraigosa is simply trying to score political points with a disingenuous cheap shot, by blithely ignoring the fact that the project being discussed today is significantly different than what voters supported in 2008. The spokesman said Newsom has never opposed high-speed rail. Instead, Newsom publicly scrutinized the projects business plan when cost estimates ballooned to nearly $100 billion and questioned Gov. Jerry Browns plans to use cap and trade funds for it, the spokesman said. Scrutinizing the business plan is very different from opposing (high-speed rail), Newman added. He said Newsoms comment in the 2014 radio interview about redirecting money away from the project was referring to redirecting cap and trade money away from it, not the state bond money passed by voters. He said a statement from Newsoms office in March 2014 clarifies Newsoms consistent support even as he questioned the projects finances: The lieutenant governor has long supported high speed rail and still does, but this project in its current form gives him pause, Newsoms spokeswoman Andrea Koskey, told Buzzfeed News for anarticleon March 27, 2014. He added that Newsoms statements of support in more recent years are also consistent with previous comments. Experts we spoke with were split on the claim. Sacramento State Political Science ProfessorWesley Husseysaid Villaraigosas claim about Newsom vacillating on the project isnt right. I don't think it's a fair assessment, the professor said in an email.Newsom came out several years ago with serious doubts about the high speed rail, but I don't think he's ever said definitely he would stop the program if he became governor. Maybe he fluctuates from lukewarm to a soft no, but that's not the same as consistently changing his opinion. Key to our assessment, however, was the 2014 radio interview and Newsoms own admission that he agreed with the growing public sentiment that opposed the train at that time. We spoke with one more expert. Lou Thompson is chairman of theCalifornia High-Speed Rail Peer Review Group, an independent oversight group that issues reports to the Legislature on the project. He declined to comment about whether he believed Newsom had definitely switched his stance on high speed rail. Thompson said, however, that redirecting cap and trade money away from the project in 2014, as Newsom suggested doing, would have made the projects future a lot more difficult. Asked whether such a move would have effectively killed the project, Thompson said: I dont know what other source of money they would have found. He described cap and trade money as the key revenue source for the project both then and now, given the restrictions on other sources, including the bond funds. Our rating Villaraigosa claimed Newsom has essentially flip-flopped in his support for Californias high-speed rail, saying he was for it, before hes against it, and then hes for it again. Villaraigosas campaign cited articles showing Newsom strongly backed the project a decade ago. It also pointed to aradio interview in 2014in which Newsom admitted that he shared the publics growing opposition to high-speed rail. He also suggested redirecting funds away from the project, a move that the head of the projects oversight panel said would have made building high-speed rail a lot more difficult. A spokesman for Newsoms campaign defended the candidates stance, saying Newsom has scrutinized project costs as they have soared beyond initial estimates. He said, however, that Newsom has never turned his back on high-speed rail. We found Villaraigosa pointed to key evidence, particularly the 2014 radio interview, that shows Newsoms stance had shifted, at least for that moment in time. In fairness to Newsom, hes consistently expressed concern that the project no longer represents what voters supported in 2008 and that his main worry was its cost. Villaraigosas statement could have used this additional information. We rate his claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. In January 2017, a screenshot of a tweet purportedly sent by President Donald Trump (pledging "mandatory drug testing" for recipients of public assistance) circulated on social media.  The text of the suspiciously undated tweet read "Drug test will be mandatory before receiving anything the government has to offer! We have to clean up these streets!":  Twitter's advanced search tool returns no results for such a tweet, and the deleted tweet archive Politwoops also has no record of President Trump's issuing such a statement via Twitter. results Politwoops Although President Donald Trump has tweeted about drug tests and drug testing in the past, none of those tweets mentioned a connection to qualifying for public assistance: drug tests drug testing The San Fran crash was totally the pilot's fault - may be too late for drug testing, RIDICULOUS!  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 9, 2013 July 9, 2013  Given the lack of standard Twitter formatting, and the lack of any attendant news  coverage about it (despite all the attention paid to Trump's Twitter feed by the news media), it's safe to say this tweet was fabricated and does not represent any statements made by President Trump via Twitter in January 2017.