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 Quincy Institute as Least Biased due to its transpartisan approach, attracting conservative and progressive donors. While their content often critiques traditional military strategies, it does so through a balanced lens, incorporating diverse perspectives from experts who critically assess various aspects of international security. We rate its factual reporting as High due to the well-researched content and a clean fact-check record.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: LEAST BIASED (1.5)
Factual Reporting: HIGH (1.1)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
History
The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft (QI) was established in December 2019 as a transpartisan “action tank” to promote a foreign policy centered around diplomacy and military restraint rather than dominance. Co-founded by Andrew Bacevich. QI received initial funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations and the Charles Koch Institute, reflecting broad ideological support. Responsible Statecraft is QI’s online magazine, which Kelley Vlahos directs. QI is headquartered in Washington, D.C.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
The institute is funded through contributions from philanthropic donors; some well-known donors include the Open Society Foundations, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Stand Together Trust, which is associated with the libertarian-leaning Koch network.
Analysis / Bias
The Quincy Institute is a transpartisan organization that advocates for a shift in U.S. foreign policy away from militaristic dominance and towards peace and diplomatic engagement. It publishes analyses and hosts events promoting a more restrained U.S. foreign policy.
For example, in the article titled “More Money, Less Security: Pentagon Spending and Strategy in the Biden Administration,” the Quincy Institute critiques the Biden administration’s approach to defense spending. The article argues that increasing Pentagon budgets does not translate to greater security but perpetuates a strategy focused on military dominance. This perspective aligns with the institute’s broader advocacy for a shift in U.S. foreign policy away from militarization and towards diplomatic solutions. The analysis emphasizes concerns over the influence of the military-industrial complex and questions the effectiveness of continued high levels of defense spending in achieving genuine national security. At the bottom of the article, the Quincy Institute references several sources, including the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), and The National Interest.
Similarly, in the symposium article “The Future of NATO,” Aydıntaşbaş stresses the importance of NATO in securing Ukraine’s future, even if full membership is not immediately achievable. The article reflects a pragmatic approach to NATO’s future, acknowledging the complexities of maintaining unity among member states while navigating a rapidly changing global landscape.
Furthermore, in the same symposium, Sir Adam Thomson offers a more cautious perspective on NATO’s future, highlighting the potential for internal fractures and the declining U.S. interest in sustaining the alliance. He argues that NATO’s future will depend on the ability of European members to take on more responsibility and the alliance’s capacity to manage emerging geopolitical challenges, particularly involving Russia and China. His analysis emphasizes the uncertainties surrounding NATO’s relevance and the potential for divisions within the alliance. This complements the Quincy Institute’s broader focus on questioning established military strategies and advocating for more restrained, diplomatic approaches to international security.
The Quincy Institute’s content typically advocates for a U.S. foreign policy prioritizing diplomacy over military action. It often resonates with left-leaning or non-interventionist views while bringing in diverse perspectives that critically assess the future of international alliances like NATO.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years. They have been used as a resource by IFCN fact-checkers.
Overall, we rate The Quincy Institute as Least Biased due to its transpartisan approach, attracting conservative and progressive donors. While their content often critiques traditional military strategies, it does so through a balanced lens, incorporating diverse perspectives from experts who critically assess various aspects of international security. We rate its factual reporting as High due to the well-researched content and a clean fact-check record. (M. Huitsing 08/27/2024) Updated (01/08/2025)
Source: https://quincyinst.org/
Last Updated on January 8, 2025 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