I check the Media Bias Status for available pages on https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/
Block me if you dislike it.
If you like this to be activated on YOUR community, message the LW Team. ( See Sidebar )
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 7412
- Joined
- 2 yr. ago
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 7412
- Joined
- 2 yr. ago
Information for Santa Barbara Independent:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for The Guardian:
Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that The Guardian is generally reliable. The Guardian's op-eds should be handled with WP:RSOPINION. Some editors believe The Guardian is biased or opinionated for politics. See also: The Guardian blogs.Wiki: mixed - Most editors say that The Guardian blogs should be treated as newspaper blogs or opinion pieces due to reduced editorial oversight. Check the bottom of the article for a "blogposts" tag to determine whether the page is a blog post or a non-blog article. See also: The Guardian.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Information for Denver Post:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for Associated Press:
Wiki: reliable - The Associated Press is a news agency. There is consensus that the Associated Press is generally reliable. Syndicated reports from the Associated Press that are published in other sources are also considered generally reliable.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for The New York Times:
Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that The New York Times is generally reliable. WP:RSOPINION should be used to evaluate opinion columns, while WP:NEWSBLOG should be used for the blogs on The New York Times's website. The 2018 RfC cites WP:MEDPOP to establish that popular press sources such as The New York Times should generally not be used to support medical claims.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for Committee to Protect Journalists:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United States of America
Information for Politico Europe:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - Germany
Information for Reuters:
Wiki: reliable - Reuters is a news agency. There is consensus that Reuters is generally reliable. Syndicated reports from Reuters that are published in other sources are also considered generally reliable. Press releases published by Reuters are not automatically reliable.
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
Information for Reuters:
Wiki: reliable - Reuters is a news agency. There is consensus that Reuters is generally reliable. Syndicated reports from Reuters that are published in other sources are also considered generally reliable. Press releases published by Reuters are not automatically reliable.
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
Information for The Guardian:
Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that The Guardian is generally reliable. The Guardian's op-eds should be handled with WP:RSOPINION. Some editors believe The Guardian is biased or opinionated for politics. See also: The Guardian blogs.Wiki: mixed - Most editors say that The Guardian blogs should be treated as newspaper blogs or opinion pieces due to reduced editorial oversight. Check the bottom of the article for a "blogposts" tag to determine whether the page is a blog post or a non-blog article. See also: The Guardian.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Information for Ars Technica:
Wiki: reliable - Ars Technica is considered generally reliable for science- and technology-related articles.
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for Philadelphia Inquirer:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for HuffPost:
Wiki: reliable - A 2020 RfC found HuffPost staff writers fairly reliable for factual reporting on non-political topics, but notes that they may give prominence to topics that support their political bias and less prominence to, or omit, things that contradict it. HuffPost's reliability has increased since 2012; articles before 2012 are less reliable and should be treated with more caution. HuffPost uses clickbait headlines to attract attention to its articles, thus the body text of any HuffPost article is considered more reliable than its headline. See also: HuffPost (politics), HuffPost contributors.Wiki: mixed - In the 2020 RfC, there was no consensus on HuffPost staff writers' reliability for political topics. The community considers HuffPost openly biased on American politics. There is no consensus on its reliability for international politics. See also: HuffPost (excluding politics), HuffPost contributors.Wiki: unreliable - Until 2018, the U.S. edition of HuffPost published content written by contributors with near-zero editorial oversight. These contributors generally did not have a reputation for fact-checking, and most editors consider them highly variable in quality. Editors show consensus for treating HuffPost contributor articles as self-published sources, unless the article was written by a subject-matter expert. In 2018, HuffPost discontinued its contributor platform, but old contributor articles are still online. Check the byline to determine whether an article is written by a staff member or a "Contributor" (also referred to as an "Editorial Partner"). See also: HuffPost (excluding politics), HuffPost (politics).
MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Information for HuffPost:
Wiki: reliable - A 2020 RfC found HuffPost staff writers fairly reliable for factual reporting on non-political topics, but notes that they may give prominence to topics that support their political bias and less prominence to, or omit, things that contradict it. HuffPost's reliability has increased since 2012; articles before 2012 are less reliable and should be treated with more caution. HuffPost uses clickbait headlines to attract attention to its articles, thus the body text of any HuffPost article is considered more reliable than its headline. See also: HuffPost (politics), HuffPost contributors.Wiki: mixed - In the 2020 RfC, there was no consensus on HuffPost staff writers' reliability for political topics. The community considers HuffPost openly biased on American politics. There is no consensus on its reliability for international politics. See also: HuffPost (excluding politics), HuffPost contributors.Wiki: unreliable - Until 2018, the U.S. edition of HuffPost published content written by contributors with near-zero editorial oversight. These contributors generally did not have a reputation for fact-checking, and most editors consider them highly variable in quality. Editors show consensus for treating HuffPost contributor articles as self-published sources, unless the article was written by a subject-matter expert. In 2018, HuffPost discontinued its contributor platform, but old contributor articles are still online. Check the byline to determine whether an article is written by a staff member or a "Contributor" (also referred to as an "Editorial Partner"). See also: HuffPost (excluding politics), HuffPost (politics).
MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Information for HuffPost:
Wiki: reliable - A 2020 RfC found HuffPost staff writers fairly reliable for factual reporting on non-political topics, but notes that they may give prominence to topics that support their political bias and less prominence to, or omit, things that contradict it. HuffPost's reliability has increased since 2012; articles before 2012 are less reliable and should be treated with more caution. HuffPost uses clickbait headlines to attract attention to its articles, thus the body text of any HuffPost article is considered more reliable than its headline. See also: HuffPost (politics), HuffPost contributors.Wiki: mixed - In the 2020 RfC, there was no consensus on HuffPost staff writers' reliability for political topics. The community considers HuffPost openly biased on American politics. There is no consensus on its reliability for international politics. See also: HuffPost (excluding politics), HuffPost contributors.Wiki: unreliable - Until 2018, the U.S. edition of HuffPost published content written by contributors with near-zero editorial oversight. These contributors generally did not have a reputation for fact-checking, and most editors consider them highly variable in quality. Editors show consensus for treating HuffPost contributor articles as self-published sources, unless the article was written by a subject-matter expert. In 2018, HuffPost discontinued its contributor platform, but old contributor articles are still online. Check the byline to determine whether an article is written by a staff member or a "Contributor" (also referred to as an "Editorial Partner"). See also: HuffPost (excluding politics), HuffPost (politics).
MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Information for Vox:
Wiki: reliable - Vox is considered generally reliable. Some editors say that Vox does not always delineate reporting and opinion content or that it is a partisan source in the field of politics. See also: Polygon, The Verge, New York
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
https://www.vox.com/politics/381470/trump-rfk-cabinet-hhs-vaccines-healthhttps://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-rfk-jr-vaccines-womens-healthn67246816e4b0871068febd91https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rfk-jr-redefines-what-maga-really-meansn66cb52bee4b077694c46be85https://www.huffpost.com/entry/howard-lutnick-trump-vaccinesn67237fe0e4b02f5ab1d287fe
Information for The Palm Beach Post:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for ProPublica:
Wiki: reliable - There is a strong consensus that ProPublica is generally reliable for all purposes because it has an excellent reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, is widely cited by reliable sources, and has received multiple Pulitzer Prizes.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for West Virginia Watch:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for BBC:
Wiki: reliable - BBC is a British publicly funded broadcaster. It is considered generally reliable. This includes BBC News, BBC documentaries, and the BBC History site (on BBC Online). However, this excludes BBC projects that incorporate user-generated content (such as h2g2 and the BBC Domesday Project) and BBC publications with reduced editorial oversight (such as Collective). Statements of opinion should conform to the corresponding guideline.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United Kingdom
Information for Associated Press:
Wiki: reliable - The Associated Press is a news agency. There is consensus that the Associated Press is generally reliable. Syndicated reports from the Associated Press that are published in other sources are also considered generally reliable.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Information for Associated Press:
https://apnews.com/article/north-korea-russia-troops-ukraine-5cb448f2f7b51a2bf60169f6c6bc3376
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support