These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence-based through credible scientific sourcing. Legitimate science follows the scientific method, is unbiased, and does not use emotional words. These sources also respect the consensus of experts in the given scientific field and strive to publish peer-reviewed science. Some sources in this category may have a slight political bias but adhere to scientific principles. See all Pro-Science sources.
- Overall, we rate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as Pro-Science and left-center biased based on views that reflect the current Biden Administration. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record.
Bias Rating: PRO-SCIENCE
Factual Reporting: HIGH
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
In 1970, to respond to the rising level of public concern about environmental pollution, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created. As a federal agency in the United States, the EPA’s primary objective is safeguarding human health and the environment. The EPA ensures clean air, land, and water for Americans, reduces environmental risks based on scientific information, administers and enforces federal laws protecting health and the environment, and integrates environmental stewardship into the U.S. Michael S. Regan is the current Administrator of the EPA. The EPA headquarters is in Washington, D.C.
Funded by / Ownership
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not explicitly state its funding sources on its funding instruments and authorities page. Nevertheless, it explains how the EPA uses its funding and outlines the legal and regulatory framework in which it operates. Conversely, data from usaspending.gov shows the total amount allocated to the EPA by the end of July 2023.
Analysis / Bias
In review, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides crucial information about safeguarding human health and the environment in the USA. For instance, an article on Acid Rain provides comprehensive, science-backed information about its causes, effects, and mitigation strategies, reflecting the EPA’s commitment to delivering factual and research-driven content. However, it’s noteworthy that the content and policy emphasis can reflect the current administration.
For instance, an article published in 2020 titled “ICYMI: Trump Administration Has Removed Environmental Regulations that Hamstring American Businesses” demonstrates a policy perspective aligned with the Trump administration’s approach towards deregulation and economic considerations. The article uses specific wording, such as describing regulations as “duplicative” and stating they “hamstring American businesses,” which indicates a bias toward portraying regulatory measures negatively and emphasizing economic considerations.
In contrast, during the Biden administration, an article titled “Biden-Harris Administration Proposes Strongest-Ever Pollution Standards for Cars and Trucks to Accelerate Transition to a Clean-Transportation Future” reflects a different tone and policy emphasis. The language used, such as “strongest-ever pollution standards” and “accelerate the ongoing transition to a clean vehicles future,” indicates a pro-environmental stance and a focus on aggressive measures to tackle climate change and improve air quality, which demonstrates that while the EPA’s information is scientifically grounded, the framing and policy emphasis may vary with the prevailing political leadership, showcasing a potential administrative bias in its communication and policy promotion.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years. Fact-checkers frequently use them as a reference.
Overall, we rate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as Pro-Science and left-center biased based on views that reflect the current Biden Administration. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record. (M. Huitsing 10/01/2023)
Last Updated on October 1, 2023 by Media Bias Fact Check
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.