RadarOnline – Bias and Credibility

RadarOnline- Least Biased - Not Credible - SensationalismFactual Reporting: Low - Not Credible - Not Reliable - Fake News - Bias


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 RadarOnline as least biased based on covering both sides with sensational stories. We also rate them Questionable based on the promotion of unproven claims and numerous failed fact checks.

Detailed Report

Questionable Reasoning: Poor Sourcing, Sensationalism, Numerous Failed Fact Checks
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY


Launched in 2008, RadarOnline is a website focusing on breaking news, celebrity stories, true crime, politics, and more. Maer Roshan is the founder and editor of the RadarOnline. Radar is managed by Empire Media Group Holdings LLC, which has its headquarters in New York City.

Read our profile on the United States government and media.

Funded by / Ownership

Dylan Howard is the owner of Radar, as he holds the positions of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer for Radar Media Group LLC., which is the entity that manages the website. The site is monetized through advertisements.

Analysis / Bias

RadarOnline specializes in sensational and exclusive stories, often featuring eye-catching headlines and strong language. For example, an article about Lamar Odom and Shannon Beador uses exclusive language like “insider” and portrays the individuals in a non-neutral manner. Here is a quote from the article: “An insider tells us Odom has yet to hear back from Beador but has not given up.” The article cites Vanity Wellness Center and factually mixed TMZ as external sources. 

Similarly, an article about Lauren Boebert, “Political Group Accuses Lauren Boebert of ‘Illegal Acts,’ Calling On U.S. Attorney in Colorado to Investigate Embattled GOP Rep,” employs strong language like “embattled” and “illegal acts” to create a sense of urgency and “accusing the two-term congresswoman of ‘allegedly using drugs'” indicate a framing that is critical of Boebert. The article employs sensational elements to capture the reader’s attention. Terms like “embattled,” “MAGA-loving,” and “illegal acts” are used to create a sense of scandal. The article cites a letter from David B. Wheeler, the head of the political action group American Muckrakers. It includes quotes from Lauren Boebert and her estranged husband, Jayson Boebert, and justice.gov.  Despite citing some sources like justice.gov, the sensational tone undermines journalistic standards.  

The outlet’s coverage spans Democratic (‘It Doesn’t Matter’: Stuttering President Joe Biden Struggles to Pronounce Acronym for Pacific Islands Infrastructure Initiative) and Republican (See Boebert above) figures, emphasizing their flaws or controversies rather than their policy positions or achievements. Given its sensational tone and focus on questionable exclusive claims, RadarOnline fits the characteristics of tabloid journalism. With numerous failed fact checks, they are also rated low for factual reporting.

Failed Fact Checks

Overall, we rate RadarOnline as least biased based on covering both sides with sensational stories. We also rate them Questionable based on the promotion of unproven claims and numerous failed fact checks. (M. Huitsing 09/26/2023)

Source: https://radaronline.com/

Last Updated on September 26, 2023 by Media Bias Fact Check

Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.

MBFC Ad-Free 


MBFC Donation

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

Found this insightful? Please consider sharing on your Social Media: