LEFT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports, and omit information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Left Bias sources.
- Overall, we rate Skwawkbox as Left biased due to its strong support for socialist policies, consistent critiques of the Conservative Party, and alignment with the far-left of the Labour Party. We rate it Mixed for factual reporting due to reliance on anonymous sources, selective reporting, heavy use of ideological framing in its articles, and a failed fact check.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: LEFT
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: United Kingdom
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
History
Skwawkbox is a UK-based political blog founded by Steve Walker in 2012. The blog initially gained attention for supporting Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party and advocating socialist policies. Over time, especially under Keir Starmer’s leadership, Skwawkbox became increasingly critical of the Labour Party’s shift towards centrist positions. Disagreeing with the party’s new direction, Steve Walker left the Labour Party and continues to express his opposition through the blog.
Read our profile on UK government influence on media.
Funded by / Ownership
Skwawkbox, owned and operated by Steve Walker, is primarily funded through reader donations and crowdfunding campaigns.
Analysis / Bias
The website focuses on political commentary, often critiquing mainstream media and conservative policies, and reflects a strongly left-wing perspective. For example, in the article “Starmer Appoints Ex-Murdoch Hack as Strategic Communications Chief,” Skwawkbox frames the story around a highly critical view of Keir Starmer’s appointment of an ex-Murdoch journalist to his communications team. The article criticizes the new hire using phrases like “Murdoch hack” to discredit the individual and Starmer’s decision without providing a balanced view of outside perspectives on the individual’s qualifications or experience.
Another issue is sourcing practice, as many hyperlinks redirect to other Skwawkbox articles, creating a circular referencing pattern. This type of sourcing relies on internal content rather than providing external, verifiable sources or independent evidence.
In the article “Starmer Had a Hoot with SN’s Political Editor on Thursday,” Skwawkbox once again critiques Keir Starmer, this time for his lighthearted demeanor during a serious political conversation, portraying him as out of touch with grassroots concerns. The author uses a sarcastic tone to imply that Starmer is not taking his role seriously, which aligns with Skwawkbox’s usual left-leaning, anti-Starmer stance.
Further, as with many Skwawkbox articles, there are few external sources, and the narrative relies heavily on opinion rather than factual reporting. This further demonstrates Skwawkbox’s tendency toward ideological bias, offering critique without balanced evidence.
In addition, in the article “Labour Right Admits It Used Antisemitism ‘Scam’ Because It Feared Corbyn Would Win,” Skwawkbox takes a pro-Corbyn stance, accusing the Labour Right of using antisemitism allegations as a tool to undermine Jeremy Corbyn. The article presents these allegations as a deliberate political tactic, framing Corbyn as the victim of an internal party plot. The language is emotionally loaded, using terms like “scam” to delegitimize the actions of the Labour right and portray Corbyn as unfairly targeted, which reflects Skwawkbox’s support for Corbyn and critiques of centrist Labour figures.
The article relies heavily on opinion and does not provide external sources, which aligns with the platform’s typical reliance on partisan narratives rather than balanced reporting.
Generally, the blog content is original reporting or opinion-based commentary, relying heavily on left-leaning ideological framing rather than neutral analysis.
Failed Fact Checks
Overall, we rate Skwawkbox as Left biased due to its strong support for socialist policies, consistent critiques of the Conservative Party, and alignment with the far-left of the Labour Party. We rate it Mixed for factual reporting due to reliance on anonymous sources, selective reporting, heavy use of ideological framing in its articles, and a failed fact check. (M. Huitsing 10/08/2024)
Source: https://skwawkbox.org/
Last Updated on October 8, 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