mediabiasfactcheck.com é seguro?

Confiado pela WOT
Site verificado

Pontuação de segurança do site

65%
A pontuação de segurança do WOT é baseada em nossas avaliações exclusivas de especialistas em tecnologia e comunidade.
Este site é reivindicado?
Sim
Avaliações da comunidade
★ 3.5
Algoritmo do WOT
70%
Segurança da Criança
N/A

O que a comunidade diz?

Deixe um comentário

De 1 a 5, que nota você daria a este site?
starempty-star
starempty-star
starempty-star
starempty-star
starempty-star
Compartilhe seus comentários e ajude a comunidadeAs resenhas devem consistir em pelo menos 15 caracteresEscolha as tags que melhor descrevem este site
Malware ou Vírus
Serviço ao cliente insuficiente
Phishing
Scam
Potencialmente ilegal
Enganoso ou antiético
Risco de Privacidade
Suspeito
Ódio, discriminação
Spam
Potencial programa indesejado
Anúncios / Pop-ups
Conteúdo Adulto
Nudez acidental
Macabro ou chocante
Cancelar
Publicar avaliação
3.5
starstarstarhalf-starempty-star

Com base em 20 avaliações

Ordenar por:
Recentes
Legitimate fact checking backed up with sources. The least biased that I've found so far. If you've found something false, please cite it in your comments instead of just making general unfounded claims of bias or incorrectness.
Útil
Legitimate fact checking backed up with sources.
Útil
Don't troll the reviews. Just fine.
Útil
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.
1
Once again, WOT has decided a site is "unsafe" for nefarious reasons which they do NOT share. WOT has become next to useless in their "ratings" . . .
Útil
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?
Útil
The people rating it low seem to not understand that it's rated by the community. It's a perfectly safe and acceptable site.
Útil
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.
Útil
A very useful website for the left and far left. It is not neutral and is seemingly disgusted with Christian websites.
2
I've used this site several times and they seem trustworthy so far. I also read several of the negative reviews and they seem to be based on anger over their favorite news source getting a poor rating. So I trust the site.
Útil
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.
Útil
Great resource and methodology!
3
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.
3
I own the MBFC website. The claims of right wing bias are completely unfounded. Furthermore, if there is bias to the right or left that does not make a website untrustworthy. We source all information to factual mainstream media sources.
5
Can't see the problem with this site. I like the lists they provide for their categories, makes it easy to do a 'face value' sanity check on their ratings.
5
A very well-balanced, comprehensive site that breaks down the bias of a myriad of news sites.
6
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.
2
A very useful website for determining the bias of media sources. Uses a methodology that is mostly accurate. This is a clean and appropriate website.
7
Claims to be neutral, but  seems somewhat biased towards right-wing politics.
6
Resposta de mediabiasfactcheck.comhá 8 anos
This website has a methodology for establishing bias that is credible. This is one of the best sources on the internet for News bias and fact checking.
Verifique se você foi comprometidoConecte-se com o Google para escanear seu histórico de navegação.
Conecte-se com o Google
Como visto em
Ao fazer login, você concorda com a coleta e o uso de dados conforme descrito em nosso Termos de uso e Política de Privacidade
alternative-placeholder

Sobre o WOT

Analisamos mais de 2 milhões de sites e contamos. O WOT é uma extensão leve projetada para ajudá-lo a navegar com rapidez e segurança. Ele limpará seu navegador, o acelerará e protegerá suas informações privadas.
Este site usa cookies para análises e personalização. Ao continuar, você concorda com a nossa política de cookies.
Aceitar