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.
- In conclusion, we rate Disntr as Right Biased and Questionable based on a lack of transparency, poor sourcing, and the promotion of pseudoscience.
Detailed Report
Questionable Reasoning: Poor Sourcing, Lack of Transparency, Pseudoscience
Bias Rating: RIGHT
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
According to its About page Disntr, previously known as Reformation Charlotte, was founded in 2018 by a group focused on Evangelism, Theology, and Apologetics. The website started as a news source for a local apologetics group but has since transformed into a blog with a conservative Christian focus. They offer exclusive content to subscribers on their Substack site. It is based in North Carolina.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
The website does not disclose its ownership. The website generates revenue through online advertisements, subscriptions, and merchandise sales.
Analysis / Bias
In reviewing the content, Disntr publishes news articles and opinion pieces that lean conservative. For instance, the article “Man Who Co-pastors Megachurch With Wife Joins the Republican Race for President” criticizes Ryan Binkley’s presidential candidacy, questioning his suitability based on his co-pastoring role with his wife. The language used in the article is loaded, and the source used is The Christian Post. A quote from the article reads, “As a pastor, he is expected to uphold and follow the Scriptures. However, his decision to co-pastor his church with his wife goes against the clearly outlined biblical requirements of pastoral authority.” The author uses loaded language, such as “If he can’t be trusted to lead his congregation with integrity, how can we expect him to lead a nation?”
Another article titled “Southern Baptist Leader, Ed Stetzer Marches in ANTIFA/Black Lives Matter Protest in Chicago” criticizes Ed Stetzer’s participation in the Chicago protests, labeling them “riots brought about by lawless anarchists.” The language shows a clear bias against the protests. While Disntr cites brnow.org as its source, it interprets and presents the information differently, giving the protest a negative connotation.
The article “Does the Bible Prove a Young Earth?” presents a perspective that supports Young Earth Creationism, a belief that the Earth is approx. Six thousand years old, based on biblical genealogies, and supports a strict interpretation of the creation narrative, which contrasts with the scientific consensus of a 4.54 billion-year-old Earth. The article lacks scientific sources, relying instead on biblical interpretation and personal opinion.
The “False Teachers of the Day” section on Disntr critiques various religious leaders, comparing their teachings to the author’s interpretation of biblical teachings. For instance, “False Teacher of the Day #55: David Hughes, Church by the Glades” criticizes Pastor David Hughes for his worship approach and sermon content. The language is emotionally loaded, showing a clear bias against Hughes and his church. A quote from the article reads, “Church by the Glades has also worshiped to a song by a feminist LGBTQ activist who dresses her son as a girl. And recently, they sanitized a foul-mouthed rap song and presented it to God for worship.”
In terms of factuality, Disntr’s content is mixed. While some articles are based on factual events, the author’s personal beliefs and biases heavily influence the interpretation and presentation of these events. The website does not consistently provide hyperlinks to external sources to support the claims made, and when sources are provided, the interpretation of the source material can be biased.
Failed Fact Checks
- None by a third-party fact-checker. They routinely promote pseudo-science.
In conclusion, we rate Disntr as Right Biased and Questionable based on a lack of transparency, poor sourcing, and the promotion of pseudoscience. (M. Huitsing 07/26/2023)
Source: disntr.com
Last Updated on July 26, 2023 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