Le site mediabiasfactcheck.com est-il sûr ?

left leaning fact checker, or as they would say, a mixed media bias fact checker rating. they definately lean left, but not as far as many others. subtle examples would be the stretch to connect conservative sites with terms inferring "hate site" without actually saying they are: ex. daily caller. yet, this slanted standard is not consistently followed when you look at the left of center sites, such as cnn or msnbc, where they frequently have racists and anti-semites on their show, and these are celebrated. they label virtually any Bible site or christian site as being conspiracy and pseudoscience. sites that have commentaries of Bible verses are not science sites, they are theology sites. perhaps if the site was a creation science site you could arguably make that statement, but when you label a site that interprets the parables of Jesus as pseudoscience ... wtf? there is a clear distain that this fact checker is exhibiting towards organized religious sites. as such, this site, ironically, is a hate site ... or at least a ... "i don't like them" site. still, it's a lot better than the likes of snopes.

They do have a ton of click bait and frankly, I would pay a fee to have no ads for this service. I am a firm believer in scientific, data-driven rating of measurable criteria to help align an Internet consumer about the media sources for which they are unfamiliar. I don't know why folks always align data and science-based stuff as left-biased. What's up with that?

It is odd that some reviewers claim the site is left biased, and some claim it is right biased. I have used it for quite a while and it seems to be balanced, and at least in terms of tracking my own casual observations, accurate. It rates sites on a spectrum from far left to far right, and appraises the factual accuracy of the sites. It judges this by examining documented instances of failed fact checks, citing sources. I have spot checked sites on both ends of the spectrum and have not found evidence of significant favoritism. Regardless of how conscientious an effort is made to produce this kind of information, it is always going to upset some people.

This site gives an unbiased view of a massive amount of news sources and I have found it to be very accurate. I see right-wingers complaining because their favorite far-right sources are not being called unbiased. This site is non-partisan. Saying otherwise without any qualifying explanation is just an attempt to discredit this non-partisan website. The sight.

This site is not biased toward right-wing sites at all, neither to left-wing sites. I've seen plenty of "mixed factual reporting" scores on both sides. Just because you're favorite site gets a bad score, doesn't mean this site is wrong. It just means that you should start getting your news from a different site (that you still agree with) that actually gives accurate facts. It's very comprehensive with its list of sites and has been a reliable, convenient source of fact-checking websites for a while now.

Extremely right wing biased, the voting "options" are biased for the left wing sites but NOT for the right wing sites. . The options for left wing news "voting" vary between propaganda and fake news, but for right wing news (even obvious propaganda sites brietbart, the gateway pundit and the blaze) get a range between extreme left and extreme right. I had really hoped that this would be an unbiased site since media is right and left biased and is like to find some reliable news.