RIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports, and omit information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.
- Overall, we rate the Center for Family and Human Rights (C-Fam) as Right Biased due to its strong alignment with conservative Catholic social positions. We rate its reporting as Mixed for factual reliability, based on its limited use of primary sourcing, consistent framing that distorts factual context through the use of loaded language, promotion of pseudoscience, and a lack of transparency regarding funding.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: RIGHT (6.4)
Factual Reporting: MIXED (5.1)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
History
The Center for Family and Human Rights (C-Fam) was founded in 1997 as the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute and is headquartered in New York City and Washington, D.C.
C-Fam, rebranded in 2013, promotes socially conservative views on abortion, family structure, and LGBT issues. Its stated mission is to “defend life and family at international institutions and to publicize the debate,” with a focus on “The preservation of international law by discrediting socially radical policies at the United Nations and other international institutions.” C-Fam is led by Austin Ruse, who has served as president since 2000.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
C-Fam is a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and is funded through donations. The organization makes its audited financial statements publicly available. However, it does not disclose its major donors or foundation affiliations, which limits transparency regarding specific funding sources.
Analysis / Bias
C-Fam demonstrates a right bias in its editorial practices, using strong, emotionally loaded language to oppose abortion, LGBT rights, and gender policies. The organization regularly publishes articles that portray progressive or multilateral initiatives as existential threats to traditional values, often without offering balanced perspectives.
For example, the article “Trump Cracks EU Bloc with War on DEI and Gender Ideology” displays ideological bias through militaristic framing and emotive language, depicting progressive values as threats and diplomacy as combat. While it may include references to actual policy developments, the framing distorts the factual context by recasting routine international negotiations as ideological warfare, thereby misleading readers about the nature and scope of the events.
Similarly, the article “WHO Gives Special Status to Radical Abortion Group,” demonstrates bias through its use of loaded language such as “radical abortion group,” “a rabidly pro-abortion legal group,” which portrays the Center for Reproductive Rights in a derogatory manner. Although the article correctly notes that the Center for Reproductive Rights holds official relations status with the WHO, it distorts the factual context by presenting the affiliation as evidence of ideological capture rather than a standard procedural designation applied to many NGOs.
In another article, they promote pseudoscience, “Abortion – Breast Cancer Link Debate Resumed,” where they falsely claim that abortions increase the incidence of breast cancer. According to the American Cancer Society, “After adjusting for known breast cancer risk factors, the researchers found that induced abortion(s) had no overall effect on the risk of breast cancer. The size of this study and how it was done provide good evidence that induced abortion does not affect a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer.”
C-Fam’s sourcing practices further reflect its advocacy orientation. Articles often rely on circular references to their content or other ideologically aligned groups, rather than linking to primary documents or neutral third-party reporting. While it occasionally cites original sources, such as the U.S. Congressional Record, in a 2003 commentary on the Center for Reproductive Rights, this type of sourcing is rare. The overwhelming reliance on internal narratives and selective quotation of official documents limits transparency, contributing to a one-sided presentation of events.
Failed Fact Checks
- None by a third-party fact checker. See the false claim example above.
Overall, we rate the Center for Family and Human Rights (C-Fam) as Right Biased due to its strong alignment with conservative Catholic social positions. We rate its reporting as Mixed for factual reliability, based on its limited use of primary sourcing, consistent framing that distorts factual context through the use of loaded language, promotion of pseudoscience, and a lack of transparency regarding funding. (M. Huitsing 07/28/2025)
Source: https://c-fam.org/
Last Updated on July 28, 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