Last updated on June 4th, 2021 at 08:03 pm
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal 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 liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Left Bias sources.
- Overall, we rate countercurrents.org Left Biased based on editorial positions that almost always favor the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High due to consistent one-sided reporting that never considers differing opinions.
Bias Rating: LEFT
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
Country: India (142/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
Founded in 2001, CounterCurrents.org is a news and opinion website based in India. According to their about page, the objective of Countercurrents.org “is to spread awareness about the climate change crisis and search for meaningful solutions. We believe that energy-intensive globalization should end, and it must be replaced by low energy, ecologically sustainable local economies.”
Funded by / Ownership
Binu Mathew owns and edits CounterCurrents.org. Subscription fees generate revenue for the website.
Analysis / Bias
Countercurrents.org provides news and opinions from a progressive left perspective endorsing environmentalism, human rights, and support for Palestine in the struggle with Israel. Articles and headlines often contain loaded emotional wording such as this Private hospitals fleecing the people by overcharging for vaccines. This story is properly sourced, as are others on the website.
Editorially, Countercurrents.org aligns strongly with the progressive left. They also promote pro-science perspectives on Climate Change and Coronavirus. While they certainly align strongly with the more so called radical left, they promote proper sourcing techniques and thus far are factual in reporting, though very one-sided.
Failed Fact Checks
- None found. However, they appeared on the IFCN unreliable news list, which was promptly retracted after Poynter was called out for poor research and oversight. Poynter makes mistakes, as they did with their assessment of MBFC in old articles. They have gotten better.
Overall, we rate countercurrents.org Left Biased based on editorial positions that almost always favor the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High due to consistent one-sided reporting that never considers differing opinions. (D. Van Zandt 6/6/2017) Updated (6/4/2021)