---

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 the purpose of 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 the Global Fact-Checking Network as Right-Center Biased and Questionable due to its direct alignment with Kremlin-linked institutions, promotion of Russian state propaganda under the guise of fact-checking, imitation of independent verification organizations, and consistent one-sided framing that favors Russian geopolitical narratives. We also rate the site Mixed for factual reporting because while it occasionally references real data and official statistics, its poor sourcing, lack of transparency, and ideologically driven interpretation of facts significantly undermine reliability.

---

History

The Global Fact-Checking Network (GFCN) is a self-described international fact-checking alliance that was first publicly presented at the “Dialogue about Fakes 2.0” forum in Moscow in November 2024, with an active website launching in April 2025. The initiative was publicly framed by Russian officials, including Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, as a counterweight to Western fact-checking organizations. According to investigations by Reporters Without Borders, GFCN was created and is managed by Kremlin-linked entities, and it functions as part of Russia’s broader international information strategy rather than as an independent verification body.

Read our profile on the Russian media and government.

Funded by / Ownership

GFCN does not provide transparent ownership or funding disclosures on its website, including its codex page. Multiple independent investigations report that the organization is co-founded and operated by Kremlin-affiliated structures, including ANO Dialog, the New Media School, and the Russian state news agency TASS. These entities are closely tied to the Russian government and have been sanctioned or criticized by the EU and press freedom organizations for spreading state propaganda. Public statements and content from GFCN, including articles authored by TASS, strongly indicate state-backed funding and coordination.

Analysis / Bias

GFCN presents itself as a neutral fact-checking organization but consistently advances narratives aligned with Russian state interests. Articles such as The head of TASS at the forum in Beijing: “Our work today is an information weapon against oblivion and lies” openly frame information work as a geopolitical tool, explicitly endorsing Russian and Chinese media cooperation against “Western disinformation.” This language is incompatible with independent fact-checking standards.

So-called fact checks frequently rely on poor or state-controlled sources, including TASS, which is rated Questionable by MBFC (MBFC profile). Coverage such as Fake news about the terrorist attack on Bondi Beach in Sydney — refutations from GFCN selectively debunks claims that implicate actors opposed to Russian or Iranian interests, while injecting ideological analysis unrelated to verifiable facts.

Long-form pieces like Czech parliamentary elections 2025: Manipulation and the role of disinformation in shaping public opinion accuse pro-EU governments and media of coordinated disinformation while minimizing or dismissing documented Russian influence operations. These articles often cite official statistics but embed them within an overtly partisan narrative that favors anti-EU, anti-Western, and pro-Russian interpretations. Independent fact-checkers from Maldita, Facta, Deutsche Welle, and the IFCN have raised concerns about GFCN’s lack of transparency, methodology, and selective framing, as documented by RSF.

Failed Fact Checks

• GFCN itself has not been formally rated by IFCN-approved fact-checkers, but multiple investigations by Reporters Without Borders, Deutsche Welle, and others document repeated misrepresentation of data, selective omission of context, and post-publication edits without disclosure. These practices fall well below professional fact-checking standards.

Overall, we rate the Global Fact-Checking Network as Right-Center Biased and Questionable due to its direct alignment with Kremlin-linked institutions, promotion of Russian state propaganda under the guise of fact-checking, imitation of independent verification organizations, and consistent one-sided framing that favors Russian geopolitical narratives. We also rate the site Mixed for factual reporting because while it occasionally references real data and official statistics, its poor sourcing, lack of transparency, and ideologically driven interpretation of facts significantly undermine reliability. (D. Van Zandt 12/18/2025)

Source: https://globalfactchecking.com/

Last Updated on December 18, 2025 by Media Bias Fact Check

---

Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.

MBFC Ad-Free 

or

MBFC Donation

---

---

---

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