A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
Overall, we rate 100 Percent Fed Up Questionable, based on extreme right wing bias through story selection, use of poor sources, promotion of propaganda through the use of loaded emotional wording, a few failed fact checks by IFCN fact checkers, and a complete lack of transparency.
Reasoning:Extreme Right, Propaganda, Poor Sourcing, Failed Fact Checks, Lack of Transparency Country: USA World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180
Founded in 2012, 100 Percent Fed Up is a far right news and opinion blog. According to their about page “We are two moms inspired by the life of Andrew Breitbart. We’re exposing the lies of the left & MSM propagandists.” They further state “Our goal is to expose the lies and hypocrisy of the progressives in academia, the entertainment industry, and MSM through the use of social media.” Like most questionable sources they do not list ownership, nor authors/staff associated with the website.
Funded by / Ownership
100 Percent Fed Up does not disclose ownership on the website. However, according to The Detroit News the website is co-owned by Tea Party activists Patty McMurray and Leisa Audette. The website also does not disclose funding, however there is advertising and a store that sells conservative and branded merchandise.
Overall, we rate 100 Percent Fed Up Questionable, based on extreme right wing bias through story selection, use of poor sources, promotion of propaganda through the use of loaded emotional wording, a few failed fact checks by IFCN fact checkers, and a complete lack of transparency. (10/21/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 4/19/2019)