IFL Science

Last updated on April 13th, 2021 at 01:30 pm

IFL SCIENCE - Left Center Bias - Liberal - Progressive - Credible - Reliable


LEFT-CENTER BIAS

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 using appeal 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 IFL Science Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that routinely favor the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to two failed fact checks and a lack of transparency regarding ownership and political direction.

Detailed Report

Bias Rating: LEFT-CENTER
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
Country: United Kingdom (35/180 Press Freedom)
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

History

IFL Science, short for I F#cking Love Science, began as a Facebook page in 2012. It then became a popular website that publishes light popular science stories. The website does not have an about page; however, their Facebook page reads “The lighter side of science.” The founder of IFLS is Elise Andrew, who holds a Bachelor of Science from the University of Sheffield. The current managing editor is Katy Evans.

Read our profile on Media and Government in the United Kingdom.

Funded by / Ownership

The website lacks transparency as it does not make it clear who owns the website. It is presumed owned by Elise Andrew through IFLScience Limited and is funded through advertising and the sale of merchandise from an online store.

Analysis / Bias

In review, IFL Science is challenging to place into a category. For the most part, the website’s information is pro-science and sourced fairly well to credible science or other popular science sources. However, IFLS has strong political opinions that align with the left, such as this: Here’s A List Of All The Science That Donald Trump Denies: Second Edition or Science Knowledge Has Almost No Effect On Republican Beliefs, According To Survey. In general, a survey of stories that relate to politics shows a left-leaning bias in story selection and political association.

The primary focus of the website is presenting easy-to-understand science stories that are on the lighter side. IFLS is generally in support of the consensus with Vaccinations, Climate Change, and GMOs. Further, throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, they have consistently promoted fact-based scientific information such as this Prior Exposure To Seasonal Coronaviruses Might Increase COVID-19 Vulnerability. However, some stories are speculative, such as this: Pieces Of A “UFO” Fell From The Sky And Landed In Remote Cambodian Village. These types of stories are derived from other sources, and IFL is just reporting it as is. In general, the information presented is usually factual, pro-science, and holds a left-leaning bias when discussing political issues.

Failed Fact Checks

Overall, we rate IFL Science Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that routinely favor the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to two failed fact checks and a lack of transparency regarding ownership and political direction. (12/12/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 04/13/2021)

Source: https://www.iflscience.com/

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

NFN-Low Biased Factual News

Video Advertisement