Ecowatch

Ecowatch - Left Bias - Liberal - Progressive - Democrat - CredibleFactual Reporting: Mostly Factual - Mostly Credible and Reliable


LEFT BIAS

These media sources are moderate 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 reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Left Bias sources.

  • Overall, we rate Ecowatch Left Biased based on editorial and policy positions that are supported by the political left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to the occasional promotion of pseudoscience.

Detailed Report

Bias Rating: LEFT
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY

History

Founded in 1998, Ecowatch is an environmental news and opinion website that publishes news with the tagline”Environmental news for a healthier planet and life.” According to their about page, “EcoWatch is a leading online environmental news company, publishing timely stories every day for a healthier planet and life.” The current managing editor is Irma Omerhodzic.

Read our profile on the United States government and media.

Funded by / Ownership

Ecowatch is owned by Remedy Review, LLC. The website generates revenue through advertising and donations.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Ecowatch’s primary focus is on climate change, and they support the consensus of science regarding this issue. Stories often come from other sources such as the left-leaning Common Dreams such as this: Harris and AOC Introduce Climate Equity Act to Protect Frontline Communities. This story is properly sourced. For the most part, Ecowatch reports with a left-leaning pro-environmental bias. In the past, Ecowatch published stories that did not align with the consensus of science regarding GMO safety and vaccinations. In 2018, leadership was changed, and Ecowatch moved to a more pro-science approach. Several articles were removed, and since 2018 we cannot find evidence of them advancing pseudoscience.

Editorially, Ecowatch promotes a liberal perspective such as this Climate Skepticism Linked to Conservative Politics Predominantly in U.S. This story is properly sourced to Nature and Ars Technica. When reporting on the former trump Administration, the topic is always related to the environment and is typically negative such as this  Trump Campaign Is Selling Plastic Straws to ‘Make Straws Great Again.’ This story is also properly sourced from USA Today and NPR.

However, we have found that pseudoscientific articles still remain on the website such as this that references the discredited Natural News: Taiwan Bans GMOs in Schools, Mandates Strict Label Laws. In general, Ecowatch reports environmental news from a strong liberal perspective and, in recent years, has made an effort to promote evidence-based science, but some pseudoscience promotion remains.

Failed Fact Checks

  • Since 2018 they have not failed a fact check.

Overall, we rate Ecowatch Left Biased based on editorial and policy positions that are supported by the political left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to the occasional promotion of pseudoscience. (D. Van Zandt 7/20/2016) Updated (09/16/2022)

Source: https://www.ecowatch.com

Last Updated on September 16, 2022 by Media Bias Fact Check

Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources