RIGHT-CENTER BIAS
These media sources are slight to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appealing to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.
- Overall, we rate The Budapest Times Right-Center Biased based on consistent deference to government narratives and heavy reliance on state/official sourcing across the reviewed articles. We rate its reporting as Mixed for factuality: the outlet attributes quotes and identifies MTI material, but often provides limited context, scant opposing viewpoints, and few external source links to verify or challenge official claims.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER (2.8)
Factual Reporting: MIXED (4.9)
Country: Hungary
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MODERATE FREEDOM
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
History
The Budapest Times is an English-language Hungarian outlet covering politics, business, and culture. According to its About page, the paper has been published since 2003. The Budapest Times is part of a small group that also publishes the German-language Budapester Zeitung and PDF dailies BT Today and BZ heute. Editorial operations are based in Budapest; the English edition is led by managing editor Attila Leitner.
Read our profile on the Hungarian media and government.
Funded by / Ownership
The site is published by BZT Media Kft., which the outlet states is “100% privately owned” by founder/publisher Jan Mainka and his wife. The legal imprint lists BZT Media Kft. as the publisher, with Mainka. Advertising and subscriptions generate revenue.
Analysis / Bias
The Budapest Times articles rely mainly on official channels such as Hungarian News Agency MTI, ministry briefings, and ruling-party statements, while rarely linking to underlying documents or including responses from the opposition, civil society, or independent experts. As a result, stories often echo government talking points despite neutral-sounding headlines.
In “Opposition DK calls on government to abandon ‘austerity’”, the piece carries the byline “BT/MTI” and reproduces the Democratic Coalition’s claims about a planned “austerity package” with brief quotations and no government response or external data; The quoted term and brief, wire format indicate reliance on agency material, with minimal context or opposing views.
By contrast, “MEPs: Péter Magyar is trying to deny pro-war support through blatant lies” largely amplifies a statement from ruling-party MEPs. The article repeats emotionally loaded language, such as “pro-peace stance” and “blatant lies,” that are attributed to the statement but not interrogated, and it offers no opposing comment from Magyar or independent documentation of the European Parliament proposal, creating a one-sided frame that mirrors government talking points.
In “Orbán: Hungary wants to reform the EU but will never leave it,” the outlet presents a long Q&A-style summary of the prime minister’s interview, emphasizing claims about Brussels “blackmailing” Hungary, migration (“non-Christians” affecting democracy), praise for Donald Trump on Ukraine, and assurances that Hungary will not exit the EU. The piece reads as a transcription with limited context, counter-evidence, or external sourcing to check the assertions, which again privileges the incumbent government’s narrative.
In the reviewed samples, the use of biased wording and headlines is generally minimal, adhering to a straightforward news style. However, the selection of stories and sources tends to favor government statements and content from the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), while coverage of opposition viewpoints is often shorter and focused on specific events. The pattern of factual reporting and sourcing includes some attribution, such as quotes and MTI tags, but overall it is limited and lacks sufficient corroborating links or official and expert documents. Although the outlet’s output, ownership, and sister publication do not explicitly state a party affiliation, the coverage examined leans toward a pro-government perspective, particularly aligning with Fidesz’s framing.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years
Overall, we rate The Budapest Times Right-Center Biased based on consistent deference to government narratives and heavy reliance on state/official sourcing across the reviewed articles. We rate its reporting as Mixed for factuality: the outlet attributes quotes and identifies MTI material, but often provides limited context, scant opposing viewpoints, and few external source links to verify or challenge official claims. (M. Huitsing 11/22/2025)
Source: https://www.budapesttimes.hu/
Last Updated on November 22, 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