LEFT-CENTER BIAS
These media sources have a slight to moderate progressive/liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor progressive/liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Left-Center sources.
- Overall, we rate Green Matters as Left-Center biased based on story selection and environmental advocacy that moderately favors the left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a lack of transparency with ownership, poor sourcing practices, and the light promotion of pseudoscience.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: LEFT-CENTER
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
History
Established in 2017 by Engrost, Inc., Green Matters is based in New York and serves as an environmental platform. Its main goal is to advocate for environmental justice, address the climate crisis, and promote sustainable living. Green Matters aims to inform and inspire positive change by raising awareness about climate-related issues.
The platform covers various topics, including sustainable living trends, climate news, and conservation, while remaining committed to providing accessible information on environmental matters. Among the other brands Engrost operates are Distractify and Market Realist, each with its unique focus and mission.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
Green Matters is owned and operated by Engrost, Inc., but the owner of Engrost, Inc. has not been publicly disclosed. Advertising generates revenue.
Analysis / Bias
Green Matters covers various sustainability and environmental topics, aligning with its mission to inform and educate. In the article titled “Why Is AliExpress So Cheap?” the platform investigates the factors contributing to AliExpress’s low prices, addressing issues such as art theft, scams, fast fashion, and harmful chemicals in products sold on AliExpress. The article also critiques AliExpress’s perceived lack of sustainability and ethical standards.
The article adopts a critical stance towards AliExpress, highlighting its negative aspects, including involvement in fast fashion and unethical practices. It employs emotionally charged language, utilizing phrases like “art theft,” “scams,” and “harmful chemicals,” which convey a critical perspective on AliExpress. Regarding sourcing, they rely on sources like Reddit and TikTok, which, while offering some insights, are not typically considered authoritative in journalism despite citing USA Today.
In the article “Biden’s vs. Trump’s Climate Plans: Whose Policy Is Stronger? Cheaper?” Green Matters compares Joe Biden’s and Donald Trump’s climate policies, emphasizing their approaches and implications for climate change and environmental policy.
The article portrays Biden’s climate policy as more comprehensive and proactive in addressing climate change. The language used in the article exhibits a clear preference for Biden’s climate policies over Trump’s, indicating a bias toward environmental action.
Green Matters demonstrates a distinct editorial bias towards environmental issues and sustainability. Using non-traditional sources like Reddit and TikTok in the AliExpress article may raise accuracy concerns. While the comparison of climate policies between Biden and Trump may be factually accurate in content, its framing favors a proactive climate policy, reflecting the platform’s pro-environmental bias.
While Green Matters supports the consensus of science when it comes to Climate Change, they offer a different opinion on GMOs. Under the heading What Is a Genetically Modified Organism, or GMO? They state, “Many environmentalists and health organizations assert that GMOs are carcinogenic and linked to other health concerns.” They counter this by saying, “conversely (and unsurprisingly), Bayer, other manufacturers of glyphosate, and producers of GMO crops tend to have opposing opinions on this, often claiming that there is no definitive proof that GMOs are unhealthy.”
This framing attempts to cover both sides; however, the statement that only manufacturers and producers of GMOs attest to their safety is false. Organizations like the World Health Organization, American Medical Association, and National Academy of Sciences have all conducted or reviewed extensive research indicating that GMOs currently in the market are safe to eat and do not present health risks. These findings are based on rigorous scientific assessments, underscoring a broad scientific consensus beyond corporate assertions. This evidence contradicts the notion that only corporate interests claim GMOs are safe, showing that independent scientific consensus also supports their safety.
In general, most content on the Green Matters website is reasonably factual; however, they lack transparency with ownership, sometimes rely on poor sources, and have lightly promoted pseudoscience, as evidenced above.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years
Overall, we rate Green Matters as Left-Center biased based on story selection and environmental advocacy that moderately favors the left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a lack of transparency with ownership, poor sourcing practices, and the light promotion of pseudoscience. (M. Huitsing 12/14/2023)
Source: greenmatters.com
Last Updated on April 5, 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