The Hayride – Bias and Credibility

The Hayride - Extreme Right Bias - Propaganda - Fake News - Not CredibleFactual 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 of 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 per article. 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 The Hayride as Far-Right biased and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, failed fact checks, a lack of transparency, and poor sourcing.

Detailed Report

Questionable Reasoning: Propaganda, Poor Sourcing, Failed Fact Checks, Lack of Transparency, Conspiracy, Pseudoscience
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY


The Hayride is a news and commentary blog founded in December 2009. The Hayride functions as an opinion-based group blog about Louisiana and national politics. The founder and publisher are Scott McKay. According to their about page, “The Hayride has been Louisiana’s premier conservative political commentary site. We’re a group blog covering Louisiana and national politics and current affairs.”

Read our profile on the United States government and media.

Funded by / Ownership

The website does not openly disclose ownership; however, Scott McKay is listed as the founder and publisher. Revenue is generated through advertising.

Analysis / Bias

In review, The Hayride primarily reports on Louisiana and national politics. Local political news reporting is often opinion based and uses loaded emotional wording such as this: SADOW: Edwards Is Awfully Ironic In Accusing Rispone Of Lacking Detail. This story is properly sourced from numerous high factual sources such as the Associated Press and Pew Research. Story selection always favors the right and often endorses former President Trump, such as this: BURLAND: Louisiana Should Dump JBE If We Want To Join The Trump Economy. National news stories also feature-loaded emotional wording that favors the right, CROUERE: Deep State Hates Trump’s America-First Policy

When it comes to reporting on scientific issues such as climate change, some of their authors are not in agreement with the consensus that humans are a significant driver of climate change. In this article, they state, “Ironically, despite the hysteria, there is no scientific consensus that man-made climate change is even real, Numerous studies, such as the research conducted by S. Fred Singer, show that the theory that climate change is man-made is “in dispute.”

Singer is best known for his denial of the health risks of second-hand smoke. In 2005, the left-leaning Mother Jones magazine described Singer as a “godfather of global warming denial.” In August 2007 Newsweek reported that in April 1998, a dozen people from what it called “the denial machine” met at the American Petroleum Institute‘s Washington headquarters. The meeting included Singer’s group, the George C. Marshall Institute, and ExxonMobil. Newsweek said that, according to an eight-page memo that was leaked, the meeting proposed a $5-million campaign to convince the public that the science of global warming was controversial and uncertain. The plan was leaked to the press and never implemented. Lastly, according to Jeffrey Masters, Ph.D. Director of Meteorology, Weather Underground:

[Singer] has testified before Congress numerous times, and is probably the most widely quoted skeptic on the ozone hole and global warming issues. Unfortunately, Dr. Singer cannot be considered an active scientist publishing in the peer-reviewed literature, or even an objective informed critic. Dr. Singer touts himself as having “published more than 200 peer-reviewed scientific papers over the course of his career”. However, Dr. Singer’s contributions to atmospheric science have been essentially zero since 1971.

During Covid-19, they made false claims, such as claiming that masks harm the healthy. They don’t. They also promoted the false stolen election narrative citing the 2000 Mules Documentary, which has been thoroughly debunked

In general, The Hayride holds far-right biased and often promotes conspiracy theories and pseudoscience to advance their editorial positions.

Failed Fact Checks

Overall, we rate The Hayride as Far-Right biased and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, failed fact checks, a lack of transparency, and poor sourcing. (M. Huitsing 8/23/2017) (Updated 02/21/2023)


Last Updated on July 1, 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: