These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation. See all Left-Center sources.
- Overall, we rate the Geopolitical Monitor as Left-Center biased based on editorial and advocacy positions that slightly favor the left. We also rate them as Mostly Factual in reporting due to a lack of transparency.
Bias Rating: LEFT-CENTER
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: EXCELLENT
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
Geopolitical Monitor is an international intelligence publication based in Toronto, founded in 2009. It specializes in analyzing geopolitical events and issues, focusing on political, military, and economic affairs. The analyses are written for an international audience and are exclusively available to members.
Read our profile on the Canadian government’s influence on media.
Funded by / Ownership
Geopolitical Monitor is published by the Geopoliticalmonitor Intelligence Corp. While the publication does not disclose its ownership details, Nicholas dePencier Wright is the founder, President, and CEO. He was the founder of the left-leaning Green Party of Nova Scotia and is an animal rights activist. The Geopolitical Monitor’s revenue is generated primarily through subscription services.
Analysis / Bias
An article by Geopolitical Monitor, headlined “Biden’s Next Regional Nightmare,” critiques the roles of U.S. President Biden and Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan in the ongoing Armenia–Azerbaijan conflict. The article frequently uses emotionally loaded language, such as “the failure of the Biden administration,” and describes actions as “treasonous by most of his constituents,” signaling a strong editorial stance. Terms like “caviar diplomacy” and “barbwire diplomacy” are used to intensify the narrative, and comparisons to a “concentration camp” highlight the author’s perceived severity of the situation.
Although the article cites credible sources, including CityLab, state.gov, and ohchr.org, these appear to be used primarily to bolster the article’s specific viewpoint, thus not offering a balanced analysis of the conflict.
When it comes to science, Geopolitical Monitor generally aligns with the consensus. For instance, the article “India Must Begin Paving the Way to Ending Coal” articulates a well-structured argument for transitioning from coal to renewable energy in India. It avoids sensational headlines and references detailed statistics and studies, such as those from Lazard’s levelized cost of energy analysis and Carbontracker.org.
Editorially, the website offers positions that show concern for climate change, indicating a left-leaning perspective on this issue. In general, Geopolitical Monitor usually provides a balanced approach to reporting, but on some issues, it leans more left than right.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years
Overall, we rate the Geopolitical Monitor as Left-Center biased based on editorial and advocacy positions that slightly favor the left. We also rate them as Mostly Factual in reporting due to a lack of transparency. (M. Huitsing 11/09/2023)
Last Updated on November 9, 2023 by Media Bias Fact Check
Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.