Manhattan Times – Bias and Credibility

---

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 profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be 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 Manhattan Times as Left Biased and Questionable due to its anti-Trump framing, advocacy tone, and lack of transparent sourcing. Its factual reliability is also Mixed due to signs of AI-assisted writing and missing citations.

---

History

The Manhattan Times is a digital news outlet based in New York, claiming to cover “top stories in North America and Europe.” It presents itself as an independent, nonpartisan publication and does not list any sponsors or political affiliations. The publication provides a contact email for Steven Mouk but does not include staff names, business registration information, a physical address, or verifiable editorial credentials.

Funded by / Ownership

The Manhattan Times does not disclose its ownership or publisher, providing only a contact email and a broad mission statement. The absence of identifiable staff and its reliance on advertising networks indicate that it may operate as a privately owned for-profit entity.

Analysis / Bias

Although The Manhattan Times claims to be neutral, its editorial content appears to lean toward a leftist perspective, raising questions about the authenticity of its authorship. For instance, the article titled “Trump’s Fantasy of Violent Blue Cities Collapses in Court” uses strong negative language when discussing Donald Trump, referring to his assertions as “fantasy” and “untethered to the facts.” While it mentions actual court cases, it doesn’t provide links, judicial citations, or any sourcing, making it tough to verify the claims being made. The way the article is written, dense and stylistically polished, feels more like something generated by AI or heavily edited, rather than traditional journalism.

 

Another example is the piece about ‘ICE Kidnapping’ Signs appearing around D.C., which seems to favor the activists’ perspective and question government officials. Although it includes quotes from residents and a DHS spokesperson, it lacks the necessary corroboration or linked sources to support them. The writing style is consistent throughout, with phrases like “When there’s great injustice, moral clarity takes a long time,” creating a rhythm that tools like GPTZero have flagged as potentially AI-generated.

 

All in all, while the topics discussed may be relevant, the lack of bylines, verifiable sources, and direct citations makes one wary about the credibility of The Manhattan Times. Its emotional language, critical tone towards Trump, and signs of possible automated authorship lead to a conclusion that places it in the category of mixed factual reporting.

 

Failed Fact Checks

• None in the Last 5 years, but the source lacks transparency entirely.

Overall, we rate The Manhattan Times as Left Biased and Questionable due to its anti-Trump framing, advocacy tone, and lack of transparent sourcing. Its factual reliability is also Mixed due to signs of AI-assisted writing and missing citations. (D. Van Zandt 10/16/2025)

Source: https://mhtntimes.com/

Last Updated on October 16, 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