ADVERTISEMENT

Bogus Fact-Check Site Used by Google Lists All Conservative Outlets as “Low Credibility” All Far Left Liberal Mainstream Outlets as "High Credibility"

TigerGrowls

Woodrush
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
21,099
12,185
113

Bogus Fact-Check Site Used by Google Lists All Conservative Outlets as “Low Credibility” – But Lists All Far Left and Liberal Mainstream Outlets as High Credibility​

By Alicia Powe
Published June 20, 2021 at 7:35am
jim-hoft-gateway-pundit-cant-censor-truth.jpg

Amid rampant censorship and demontization of the truth, conservatives are being purged from the internet.
Left-wing propaganda is brazenly permeating the airwaves, dominating the narrative in mainstream media, entertainment and academia.
In an effort to bolster the iron curtain and reinforce misinformation, an explosion of “fake-news” fact-checker sites devoted to delegitimizing The Gateway Pundit to continue to emerge.
The self-appointed gatekeepers of facts operate under the guise that they have no bias whatsoever and are typically cloaked behind a veil of anonymity.
TRENDING: WE CAUGHT THEM: President Trump Warned Raffensperger and His Attorney Ryan Germany About Election Fraud - New Evidence Shows Germany Was Made Aware of Election Fraud on Election Night And Hid This From President Trump
In reality, they are merely liberal activists with, no actual journalism, experience intent on reinforcing their preconceived narratives and opinionating news.
20200512_misInformation_1000x700-790x310-1.jpg

Fact-checking is an imminent necessity because “you’re not intelligent enough to adequately read, research and or rationalize for yourself,” the socialist arbiters of truth proclaim, “so, you must rely on us to filter out the ‘fake news.'”
Exhibit A: MediaBIasFactCheck.com, a fact-checking that prides itself as “the most comprehensive media bias resource in the Internet,” despite being run by an owner who was previously exposed for misleadingly claiming to be a journalist.
304.jpg

According to the fact-checking site, The Gateway Pundit is not “right-center” or “right,” but “extreme” and ranks “very low” in factual reporting for premising its reports on “failed facts on a near-daily basis.”

000-GP2.jpg

MediaBiasFactCheck.com also claims The Gateway Pundit reports “propaganda,” “conspiracy,” “Nationalism” and “Some Fake News” and shares its “low credibility” rating with every prominent centrist or right of center media organizations. These “fake-news”-selling media organizations include the Daily Caller, Breitbart, The Blaze, The Daily Wire, The Daily Mail, Epoch Times, The Federalist, Louder With Crowder, Project Veritas and Washington Free Beacon.
Breitbart.com–

000-br.jpg

Daily Mail –
000-dm.jpg

The Federalist –
000-fed.jpg

Louder with Crowder
000-lc.jpg

Project Veritas –
000-pv.jpg

Notoriously left-leaning publications including Huffington Post, NPR, Daily Beast, The New York Times, The Young Turks, Southern Poverty Law Center and LA Times were all deemed “Left-Biased” or “Left-Center” and ranked favorably with “high credibility” by the formidable “experts” of fake news.
Daily Beast

000-db.jpg

NPR –
000-npr.jpg

LA Times –
000-lat.jpg

000-YT.jpg

The New York Times
000-nyt.jpg

Southern Poverty Law Center –
000-splc.jpg

Dave Van Zandt, a healthcare industry worker from North Carolina and owner of MediaBiasFactCheck.com, touts his site as frequently being referenced by reputable center-left sources including “USA Today, Reuters Fact Check, Science Feedback, Washington Post, and NPR, among dozens of others.”
According to Zandt’s bio, you can trust his arbitration of facts because “since High School (a long time ago), Dave has been interested in politics and noticed as a kid the same newspaper report in two different papers was very different in their tone.”
van-zandt.jpg

Yet, in an astounding example of deceptive hypocrisy, Zandt was forced in 2017 to amend his biography for including outright false information about his credentials following a fact-check of MediaBiasFactCheck.com conducted by the conservative news site World Net Daily.​

Zandt had previously claimed in his biography that he was a veteran journalist with over two decades of experience:
“Dave has been freelancing for 25+ years for a variety of print and web mediums (sic), with a focus on media bias and the role of media in politics. Dave is a registered Non-Affiliated voter who values evidence-based reporting,” his biography stated in 2017, as WND reports. “Dave Van Zandt obtained a Communications Degree before pursuing a higher degree in the sciences. Dave currently works full-time in the health care industry. Dave has spent more than 20 years as an armchair researcher on media bias and its role in political influence.”
Yet, not a single or byline or article written by Zandt could be found on the web to corroborate Zandt actually worked as a journalist.
Pressed on his purported “25+ years” of experience writing for print and web media, Zandt admitted the information he provided about his journalism background was fabricated.
“I am not sure why the 25+ years is still on the website. That was removed a year ago when I first started the website. All of the writing I did was small print news zines from the ’90s. I felt that what I wrote in the ’90s is not related to what I am doing today so I removed it. Again, I am not a journalist,” he told WND. “I simply have a background in communications and more importantly science where I learned to value evidence over all else. Through this, I also became interested in research of all kinds, especially media bias, which is difficult to measure and is subjective to a degree.”
Like MediaBiasFactCheck.com, its competitors, which are deemed by big tech as the nation’s most prominent fact-checking organizations, tilt to the political left.
PolitiFact, which has previously the assertion “people can change their sex just because they feel that they are not their biological sex” is a “fact,” is heavily funded by leftist institutions including the Ford Foundation, the Tides Foundation, the Omidyar Network Fund.
The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, which uses Pinocchio ratings to rank the truthfulness of statements, is owned by Amazon.com CEO Jeff Bezos. In 2016, Bezos, a Democratic Party donor, deployed an army of 20 newspaper staffers to scour Donald Trump’s life for any dirt they could find on the presumptive GOP nominee.
Snopes’ “principal fact-checker” Kim LaCapria is a former sex-and-fetish blogger who described her routine as smoking pot.
The fact-checkers are giving their funders a bang for their buck. After all, low-information voters believe their fact-checking is legitimate.
 
Its just shocking that outlets that specialize in conspiracy theories and misinformation could be labeled "low credibility".
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374
Hmmm... I noticed that you didn't use CNN and MSNBC. Aren't those the very sites that you are always making pee pee in your panties about being left bias? Did you look those up OR did you just copy and paste TGP? So let's check what the very site that TGP is referring to has to say about CNN and MSNBC...
Here's MSNBC:

  • Overall, we rate MSNBC Left Biased based on story selection that consistently favors the establishment left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to news hosts and the website producing 3 pants on fire claims.
And CNN:

Overall, we rate CNN left biased based on editorial positions that consistently favor the left, while straight news reporting falls left-center through bias by omission. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks by TV hosts. However, news reporting on the website tends to be properly sourced with minimal failed fact checks.

And just for giggles, let's do FoxNews:

  • We rate Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to editorial positions and story selection that favors the right. We also rate them Mixed factually and borderline Questionable based on poor sourcing and the spreading of conspiracy theories.

So let's review. Your headline reads:

Bogus Fact-Check Site Used by Google Lists All Conservative Outlets as “Low Credibility” All Far Left Liberal Mainstream Outlets as "High Credibility"​


and yet the very sites that you always go on and on about (CNN and MSNBC) are rated biased and mixed NOT High Credibility. And FoxNews is listed as mixed as well, NOT low credibility. OH NO!! The gateway pundit and you are full of shit AGAIN!!! Who could have imagined it? Do the 3 biggest new sites not count towards your ALL?
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374
Hmmm... I noticed that you didn't use CNN and MSNBC. Aren't those the very sites that you are always making pee pee in your panties about being left bias? Did you look those up OR did you just copy and paste TGP? So let's check what the very site that TGP is referring to has to say about CNN and MSNBC...
Here's MSNBC:

  • Overall, we rate MSNBC Left Biased based on story selection that consistently favors the establishment left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to news hosts and the website producing 3 pants on fire claims.
And CNN:

Overall, we rate CNN left biased based on editorial positions that consistently favor the left, while straight news reporting falls left-center through bias by omission. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks by TV hosts. However, news reporting on the website tends to be properly sourced with minimal failed fact checks.

And just for giggles, let's do FoxNews:

  • We rate Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to editorial positions and story selection that favors the right. We also rate them Mixed factually and borderline Questionable based on poor sourcing and the spreading of conspiracy theories.

So let's review. Your headline reads:

Bogus Fact-Check Site Used by Google Lists All Conservative Outlets as “Low Credibility” All Far Left Liberal Mainstream Outlets as "High Credibility"​


and yet the very sites that you always go on and on about (CNN and MSNBC) are rated biased and mixed NOT High Credibility. And FoxNews is listed as mixed as well, NOT low credibility. OH NO!! The gateway pundit and you are full of shit AGAIN!!! Who could have imagined it? Do the 3 biggest new sites not count towards your ALL?


This is where @TigerGrowls will claim he never said it was true,just sharing the story. I have yet to see him admit that the GWP was ever wrong. It's pitiful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dpic73
I will if they are ever wrong. The Hoft bros are bad ass and the besties! LOL!! ;)
LMAO... You just got COLD BUSTED quoting a TGP lie. Again, here's your headline:

Bogus Fact-Check Site Used by Google Lists All Conservative Outlets as “Low Credibility” All Far Left Liberal Mainstream Outlets as "High Credibility"​


But if you use the VERY SAME factchecking site you are busting on to CNN and MSNBC (and FoxNews). You see the lie that you just told... That headline is simply not true and you can see it by just typing in the names.

But you just said "I will if they are ever wrong." Like I've said before, your train to Trump la la Land left the station LONG AGO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374
Its just shocking that outlets that specialize in conspiracy theories and misinformation could be labeled "low credibility".

This is a fact​

Milkmaid Jill Biden Gets Cover of Vogue After They Ignored Supermodel Melania For Five Years​

 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

This is a fact​

Milkmaid Jill Biden Gets Cover of Vogue After They Ignored Supermodel Melania For Five Years​

Uhh, Vogue wasn't necessarily what I had in mind when I said news outlet, but it's interesting to know you read it. Please keep us updated on the cover models.
 
Uhh, Vogue wasn't necessarily what I had in mind when I said news outlet, but it's interesting to know you read it. Please keep us updated on the cover models.
Actually, I stole that headline from gateway pundit. To be honest, I don't believe SHAT what I read from anywhere anymore from anywhere. If it's a technical article, I'll consider the opinion but I want to see the analysis before I render my judgement.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT