QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
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 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 Al Mayadeen as Left-biased due to its alignment with progressive ideologies and questionable based on promoting pro-Hezbollah propaganda, poor sourcing techniques, a lack of transparency, and several failed fact checks.
Detailed Report
Reasoning: Propaganda, Poor Sourcing, Lack of Transparency, Failed Fact Checks
Bias Rating: LEFT
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: Lebanon
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: LIMITED FREEDOM
Media Type: TV Station
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Launched in 2012, Al Mayadeen serves as the official website for the Beirut-based pan-Arabist satellite TV channel of the same name. It covers diverse regions, including Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, Palestine, the United States, and Canada. Al Mayadeen aims to provide a platform for voices in the Arab world, focusing on supporting the Palestinian cause and regional resistance movements. It is often referred to as pro-Hezbollah.
Read our profile on Lebanon’s media and government.
Funded by / Ownership
Al Mayadeen’s financial and ownership details lack transparency, with beliefs that it receives backing from Middle Eastern entities and governments aligned with the resistance axis, such as Syria, Iran, and potentially groups like Hezbollah. The channel’s editorial stance counters narratives from Sunni Gulf Arab-funded channels like Al Jazeera, particularly regarding Syria and Iran. Despite assertions of independence from Al Mayadeen’s leadership, the undisclosed nature of its funding prompts speculation about potential influences on its content.
Analysis / Bias
Al Mayadeen’s ideological stance, emphasizing diversity, equality, social justice, and anti-imperialism, aligns with progressive or left-leaning ideologies. This alignment is exemplified by its association with Hezbollah, which advocates left-wing principles such as social justice. Al Mayadeen’s pro-Hezbollah stance has prompted responses from Israel, including the shutdown of Al Mayadeen’s operations, citing national security concerns due to its alignment with Hezbollah.
Our analysis of Al Mayadeen’s articles shows how their use of emotionally loaded language and framing reflects a bias favoring certain narratives, such as the article “Tensions erupt at NYT over debunk of Hamas sexual violence lies,” which reports on internal conflicts within the New York Times (NYT) following a report challenging allegations of sexual violence by Hamas. The framing suggests a bias in favor of Hamas and against Western narratives. While its reporting parallels credible sources like NPR’s article, it still reflects Al Mayadeen’s editorial slant, questioning the reliability of Western media and strengthening its image as a truthful counter-narrative.
Similarly, the article “Washington Fears The Month Of Ramadan In Palestine,” demonstrates a clear pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli stance, referring to Israel as the “Zionist Entity” and describing its military actions in Gaza as a “genocidal assault.” Such language indicates a strong political bias, portraying the US negatively and suggesting Washington’s complicity in Israeli actions. Emotionally loaded terms like “graveyard for Israeli invaders” and “genocide unfolding in Gaza” further emphasize the channel’s alignment with resistance narratives against Israel. While some points may be rooted in truth, the language lacks neutrality and aims to evoke specific emotional responses. The absence of Israeli perspectives presents a one-sided view of the conflict.
In general, Al Mayadeen’s strong bias against Israel, coupled with reliance on internal references rather than external sources, undermines its credibility and contributes to one-sided reporting.
Failed Fact Checks
- The Israeli army opened fire on the medics of the al-Shifa hospital in the Gaza Strip – False
- Sudanese investigation committee highlighted suspicions that these weapons were intended for crimes against. – Misleading
- Dozens of Israeli settlers flee from the Western Wall in occupied Al-Quds after emergency sirens were activated. – Misleading
Overall, we rate Al Mayadeen as Left-biased due to its alignment with progressive ideologies and questionable based on promoting pro-Hezbolla propaganda, poor sourcing techniques, a lack of transparency, and several failed fact checks. (M. Huitsing 03/08/2024)
Source: https://english.almayadeen.net/
Last Updated on March 8, 2024 by Media Bias Fact Check
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.
or
Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources