Skeptic Ink – Bias and Credibility

Factual Reporting: Mixed - Not always Credible or Reliable


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 very 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 Skeptic Ink Questionable based on a lack of transparency and poor sourcing of information.

Detailed Report

Questionable Reasoning: Poor Sourcing, Lack of Transparency
Bias Rating: NOT RATED
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: Unknown (lack of transparency)
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY


Founded in 2012, Skeptic Ink is an independent outlet for scientific skepticism discourse. They are a diverse cast of writers, academics, philosophers, activists, and professionals writing on various topics but with concentrations in secularism and religion, philosophy, social justice, and social sciences.

There is a lack of transparency as they do not clearly state ownership or location.

Funded by / Ownership

Skeptic Ink lacks transparency as they do not disclose ownership or how they generate revenue.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Skeptic Ink is a blog/website that publishes scientific and skeptical information. Most articles are emotional and do not properly source their information, such as this OPERATION HAND OF GOD. This opinion piece is not sourced at all. There is again zero sourcing from other sources in another titled THE UNNECESSARY SCIENCE – A USEFUL SUMMARY. This is a mostly pro-science source, but with the lack of sourcing and transparency, we render them Questionable by default.

Failed Fact Checks

  • None in the Last 5 years

Overall, we rate Skeptic Ink Questionable based on a lack of transparency and poor sourcing of information. (D. Van Zandt 2/14/2017) Updated (08/14/2023)


Last Updated on August 14, 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: