LEAST BIASED
These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes). The reporting is factual and usually sourced. These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biased Sources.
- Overall, we rate the Middle East Institute as Least Biased due to political stances that reflect both right-leaning and left-leaning viewpoints. We also rate them as Mostly Factual rather than high due to occasionally not sourcing properly and the potential influence of funding from countries that may impact impartiality.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: LEAST BIASED
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL
Country: United States
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
History
Middle East Institute (MEI) is a non-profit think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1946 by George Camp Keiser to promote dialogue and provide analysis on regional issues, MEI aims to enhance U.S. citizens’ knowledge of the Middle East and foster understanding between the people of the two regions.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
The Middle East Institute (MEI) operates as a non-profit 501(c)(3) institution, relying on contributions from various donors to fund its initiatives. The Middle East Institute (MEI) discloses a list of its donors quarterly on its website and through annual reports. Some notable contributors include the UAE Embassy, which contributed $1,775,000, and the U.S. State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research, which contributed $118,473. MEI also received $40,000 from ExxonMobil.
Analysis / Bias
The Middle East Institute (MEI) covers various topics such as defense, security, technology, and regional affairs in its blog posts, organizing them by relevant subjects. Articles address multiple issues, from regional conflicts to cultural, economic, and political developments. For instance, the blog post we analyzed spans topics from U.S. military actions in the Middle East to political dynamics in Iraq and regional diplomatic efforts. Each piece provides a detailed analysis of these subjects, reflecting on these events and decisions’ broader geopolitical and social impacts.
MEI presents analyses that support a tough stance on Iran; for instance, the article “Monday Briefing: U.S. Lashes Out at Iranian Militia Proxies, but Those Strikes Will Not Deter Tehran or Its Regional Network” frames its discussion around the skepticism of the effectiveness of U.S. military actions in the Middle East, specifically against Iranian militia proxies. It suggests that despite these military strikes, they are unlikely to deter Tehran or affect its regional strategies, implying a critical view of the U.S. approach expressing skepticism about their effectiveness in deterring Iranian influence. Given Saudi Arabia’s well-known rivalry with Iran in the Middle East, this perspective could reflect Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy priorities, not to assert bias directly but to illustrate how financial backing might intersect with the thematic focus of the institute’s publications and analyses.
Another piece, “Biden’s executive order on settler terror is potentially far-reaching,” critically assesses the order’s effectiveness and its impact on settler violence, reflecting skepticism about U.S. policies in the Middle East. Regarding the sourcing, sources vary across the articles, with some featuring extensive use of hyperlinks and others not. The referenced sources include a range of platforms from Rudaw and The Hill to ScienceDirect, government websites like state.gov, and major news outlets such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, CNN, B’Tselem, and Reuters.
While MEI often advocates for a hawkish approach, they also promote concern for climate change, such as this Greenwashing in a time of global warming. The diversity of opinions by MEI warrants a least biased rating as they hold views from both sides of the political spectrum.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years. They are frequently used as a resource by fact-checkers.
Overall, we rate the Middle East Institute as Least Biased due to political stances that reflect both right-leaning and left-leaning viewpoints. We also rate them as Mostly Factual rather than high due to occasionally not sourcing properly and the potential influence of funding from countries that may impact impartiality. (M. Huitsing 04/06/2024)
Source: https://www.mei.edu/
Last Updated on April 6, 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