Last updated on May 13th, 2021 at 07:15 pm
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information; therefore, fact-checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.
- Overall, we rate the Environmental Working Group Left Biased and a strong Pseudoscience website based on the promotion of ideas and claims that oppose science consensus.
Bias Rating: LEFT-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: USA (44/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
Founded in 1992, The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is an American environmental organization specializing in research and advocacy in toxic chemicals, agricultural subsidies, public lands, and corporate accountability. EWG is a non-profit organization (501(c)(3)) whose mission, according to its website, is “to use the power of public information to protect public health and the environment.”
The group also has a lobbying arm called EWG Action Fund, a 501(c)(4) corporation that promotes policy change.
Funded by / Ownership
EWG is a non-profit organization (501(c)(3), funded through donations. They are transparent, indicating the following donors David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Walton Family Foundation, Turner Foundation, and others. They also list corporate partner as Organic Valley, Stonyfield Farms, Earthbound Farms, Applegate, Klean Kanteen, Dr. Bronner Soaps, Beautycounter, Juice Beauty, and Brown Advisory.
Analysis / Bias
The Environmental Working Group publishes a list of the “Dirty Dozen” fruits and vegetables that contain the most pesticides. The list is based on data from the Pesticide Program Residue Monitoring of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While many of the articles on this website are factual, many fall in the pseudoscience categories, such as promoting the cell phone-cancer link when there is no evidence to support it. Due to pesticides, they often promote organic foods, which does not consider that numerous pesticides are used in organic farming. They also are opposed to GMOs, which go against the consensus of science regarding safety.
Editorially, EWG aligns with the left when it comes to environmental issues, often promoting pseudoscience.
Overall, we rate the Environmental Working Group Left Biased and a strong Pseudoscience website based on the promotion of ideas and claims that oppose science consensus. (D. Van Zandt 5/10/2017) Updated (5/13/2021)