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 very 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.
- Overall, we rate Facts.net as Least Biased based on its neutral presentation of information across various topics. However, we also rate them as questionable due to a lack of transparency, being an imposter site, and using misleading and irrelevant hyperlinks, which can distort information and confuse readers.
Detailed Report
Questionable Reasoning: Imposter Site, Lack of Transparency, Poor Sourcing
Bias Rating: LEAST BIASED
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: Unknown
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: N/A
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Facts.net is an online platform that collects and shares facts from various fields. According to its About page, it aims to spark curiosity in its readers and bridge the gap between education and entertainment. The available information does not provide the specific foundation date of Facts.net. The platform covers various facts, from bacteria to culture, history to science. It is not clear where this website originates.
Funded by / Ownership
Facts.net is an online platform that shares facts on various topics. The specific funding and ownership details are not publicly disclosed, but it likely generates revenue through advertising and sponsored content. The uniformity of team member images on the “Meet the Team” page suggests they may be AI-generated, though this cannot be confirmed with certainty.
A search for team members does not reveal any information on them. In fact, one team member listed is Jessica Corbett, Senior Fact Checker, and appears to be fake. The real Jessica Corbett, who is senior editor of the website Common Dreams, states, “I have never done any work for Facts.net. As far as I can tell, it’s an AI operation, and these “team members” aren’t real.
Analysis / Bias
Facts.net is an online platform sharing information on various topics, including about celebrities and environmental issues. For instance, the article “50 Facts About Ashley Olsen” provides a comprehensive overview of Ashley Olsen’s life and career, covering various aspects from her early start in showbiz to her global fashion empire. This article does not favor a particular perspective or promote a specific agenda. However, there are potential issues with the use of cited sources. For example, the article links to a library when mentioning that Ashley Olsen is an “avid reader,” which is misleading and irrelevant since there’s no direct connection between the two.
Another article analyzed is the “Climate Facts” piece on Facts.net, which exhibits a similar practice using hyperlinks. It includes a hyperlink to a blood thinner when discussing the concept of “thinner” in a climate context, which could be misleading.
The observed issues of using misleading and irrelevant hyperlinks are problematic because they can undermine the overall reliability and accuracy of the content, potentially confuse readers, and distort the presented information.
In general, Facts.Net is an imposter website that looks like a source that publishes facts. In fact, it is a clickbait site that automatically inserts hyperlinks over words in articles, redirecting to an irrelevant page on the website. This practice is designed to increase page views and advertising revenue. While the facts may be accurate, there is no way to verify them with unrelated links.
Failed Fact Checks
- They have not been checked by a third-party fact-checker.
Overall, we rate Facts.net as Least Biased based on its neutral presentation of information across various topics. However, we also rate them as questionable due to a lack of transparency, being an imposter site, and using misleading and irrelevant hyperlinks, which can distort information and confuse readers. (M. Huitsing 05/16/2024)
Source: https://facts.net/
Last Updated on May 16, 2024 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