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 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 AUF1 as Extreme Right Biased and Questionable. This rating is based on its consistent promotion of conspiracy theories, far-right political narratives, anti-science content, and highly inflammatory, one-sided reporting. We rate AUF1 Low for factual reporting due to repeated misinformation, a lack of credible sourcing, strong propaganda framing, and failed fact-checks by reputable organizations.
Detailed Report
Questionable Reasoning: Propaganda, Poor Sourcing, Failed Fact Checks, Conspiracy
Bias Rating: EXTREME RIGHT (9.0)
Factual Reporting: LOW (8.2)
Country: Austria
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
AUF1 (Alternative Unabhängige Fernsehen 1) is an Austrian online television and media platform founded in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic by editor-in-chief Stefan Magnet. According to its own About Us page, AUF1 was created in response to pandemic-era policies and what it describes as the marginalization of dissenting voices. The outlet positions itself as an “alternative independent television” network serving German-speaking audiences in Austria and Germany, with a focus on opposition to mainstream political, scientific, and media institutions.
Read our profile on the Austrian media and government.
Funded by / Ownership
AUF1 states that it is financed exclusively through viewer donations via its support page, Unterstützen. The outlet claims it does not receive state funding or advertising revenue and portrays its donation-based model as proof of independence. Ownership and editorial control are not separated; AUF1 is run by its founding leadership, including Stefan Magnet.
Analysis / Bias
AUF1 is an explicitly ideological outlet that promotes far-right narratives, conspiracy theories, and anti-establishment rhetoric. Its own editorial framing emphasizes opposition to “gender ideology,” “climate hysteria,” vaccinations, and the so-called “Great Reset,” as stated on its Über uns page.
Content frequently praises or positively amplifies right-wing political movements, including favorable coverage of the AfD, such as Höcke close to an absolute majority? AfD Thuringia breaks poll record!. Headlines often use loaded, emotional language, including anti-immigration framing like Indians instead of Syrians: Von der Leyen wants to combat illegal migration with even more migration.
The site also promotes medical misinformation, exemplified by “Under no circumstances should you take an mRNA vaccine!”, which contradicts established scientific consensus. AUF1 rejects labels such as “far-right” in its own defense, including Rechtsextremismus – eine grundsätzliche Anmerkung and Rechtsextrem? Na und?, while framing criticism as part of a coordinated system attack.
Failed Fact Checks
- AUF1-related claims have been debunked by IFCN-approved fact-checkers. For example, AFP Fact Check debunked false claims linking mpox to COVID-19 vaccines in Posts falsely link mpox with Covid vaccines, which circulated in the same misinformation ecosystem promoted by AUF1. This contributes to a poor factual track record.
Overall, we rate AUF1 as Extreme Right Biased and Questionable. This rating is based on its consistent promotion of conspiracy theories, far-right political narratives, anti-science content, and highly inflammatory, one-sided reporting. We rate AUF1 Low for factual reporting due to repeated misinformation, a lack of credible sourcing, strong propaganda framing, and failed fact-checks by reputable organizations. (D. Van Zandt 12/15/2025)
Source: https://auf1.tv/
Last Updated on December 15, 2025 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

