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 InSight Crime as Left-Center Biased based on advocacy and editorial positions that align with a liberal left-leaning perspective. We also rate them as Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to potential limitations in research methods and poor sourcing practices.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: LEFT-CENTER
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
History
InSight Crime is a non-profit organization founded in 2010 by Jeremy McDermott and Steven Dudley. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C. The organization’s mission is to create an online platform to connect various aspects of organized crime in Latin America, including the players and organizations involved, and to evaluate the effectiveness of initiatives designed to combat them. In addition to publishing information on its website, InSight Crime conducts investigations across Latin America for private and government organizations.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
InSight Crime is a 501(c)(3) non-profit entity. The organization’s funding has come from the Open Society Foundations, American University’s Center for Latin American and Latino Studies, and Sweden’s government agency SIDA. InSight Crime Incorporated is rated by Charity Navigator with a score of 92%, earning it a Four-Star rating. This assessment is based primarily on their Accountability & Finance metrics.
Analysis / Bias
InSight Crime’s “2023 By The Numbers” outlines their in-depth analysis of organized crime in Latin America and the Caribbean. They reportedly published 15 in-depth investigations and conducted 38 field trips across the region, interviewing over 1,000 individuals in 2023.
Their featured report, “Stolen Amazon: The Roots of Environmental Crime in the Tri-Border Regions,” investigates illegal activities in the Amazon, focusing on environmental crimes and their impact on local communities. The report employs emotionally loaded language, such as “Mad scramble to unearth gold,” “Tens of thousands of them have invaded the territory,” “Scarred the earth and left mud pits,” “Illegal prospectors have even razed forest,” “Criminal actors and illicit economies flow and merge like the region’s many rivers,” and “Amazon forest is being felled to grow coca.”
These examples demonstrate how the choice of words and phrases can introduce a subjective tone into a report. While such language can be effective in drawing attention to the seriousness of the issues, it also has the potential to shape the reader’s perception, steering them towards a particular emotional or judgmental response rather than a purely factual understanding.
Methodologically, the report is based on desktop research, phone interviews, and fieldwork in Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, and Brazil. It uses firsthand accounts and broader research to build its narrative. However, while practical, reliance on phone interviews may limit the depth of understanding, especially in marginalized communities. Furthermore, verifying the credibility of sources over the phone is challenging, and the need for anonymity due to security concerns in high-crime areas raises ethical questions.
We also analyzed news articles, such as the article on Former President Trump’s approach to organized crime in Latin America titled “How President Donald Trump Has Impacted Organized Crime in Latin America,” which uses emotionally loaded language, such as Phrases like “unilateral policies that largely backfired” and “mercurial approach” imply an aggressive, ineffective, and unpredictable policy strategy. Terms such as “squandered efforts” and “ineffective border wall” further emphasize a negative judgment on the administration’s actions, indicating a subjective viewpoint that could influence readers’ perceptions. The article relies on circular referencing and cites its previous reports and investigations. It also references Whitehouse.gov. However, some external links, such as the one referring to the “White House memorandum,” paved the way,” leading to a 404/Page Not Found error, indicating broken links.
In general, InSight Crime’s efforts to analyze organized crime in Latin America are commendable, but the choice of language and certain methodological aspects may introduce subjectivity into their work.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years. They are used by fact-checkers as a reference.
Overall, we rate InSight Crime as Left-Center Biased based on advocacy and editorial positions that align with a liberal left-leaning perspective. We also rate them as Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High due to potential limitations in research methods and poor sourcing practices. (M. Huitsing 01/14/2024)
Source: insightcrime.org/
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