LEFT BIAS
These media sources are moderate 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 appealing 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 UNFTR as left-biased due to its explicit progressive mission and advocacy-driven commentary. We rate it Mostly Factual because its work is generally grounded in real events and historical data, but conclusions are shaped by strong editorial bias, emotionally charged language, and selective presentation of evidence.
Detailed Report
Bias Rating: LEFT (-6.5)
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL (2.9)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Minimal Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
History
UNFTR publishes political commentary, podcasts, newsletters, and long-form essays on its website. According to its About page, UNFTR launched in 2020 as a podcast and later expanded into a YouTube channel, a twice-weekly newsletter, and written news coverage through a partnership with News Beat. The project explicitly aims to challenge dominant political narratives using historical analysis and openly states that its work is presented from a progressive perspective.
Read our profile on the United States media and government.
Funded by / Ownership
UNFTR is independently operated and funded primarily through audience support. Revenue is generated via reader and listener contributions through memberships and paid supporter tiers, such as the Supporter membership. There is no indication of corporate ownership or traditional advertising as a primary funding source.
Analysis / Bias
UNFTR is an openly ideological outlet that blends journalism, historical analysis, and political advocacy. While it emphasizes research and sourcing, its framing consistently reflects progressive political positions, particularly on economics, climate policy, executive power, civil liberties, and corporate influence. Language is frequently forceful, moralistic, and dismissive of opposing viewpoints, reinforcing its advocacy orientation rather than neutral analysis.
For example, the essay Why Trickle-Down Economics Was Always a Scam uses decades of economic data to argue that supply-side economics deliberately benefits the wealthy at the expense of workers. While the article references historical legislation and economic trends, it employs emotionally charged language such as “scam,” “zombie theory,” and “wealth transfer,” leaving little room for alternative economic interpretations.
Similarly, The Year of the Imperial Presidency characterizes President Donald Trump’s second term as a “controlled demolition of democracy,” framing executive actions almost exclusively through a civil-liberties and anti-authoritarian lens. The piece assumes a high level of agreement with its underlying premises and does not meaningfully engage with legal or policy defenses offered by the administration.
The article United States of Palantir critiques Palantir Technologies’ government contracts and surveillance capabilities, highlighting concerns raised by civil-liberties advocates and former employees. While much of the reporting is grounded in documented contracts and public reporting, the narrative framing strongly emphasizes authoritarian risk and corporate malfeasance, reinforcing UNFTR’s broader ideological worldview.
Across its content, UNFTR prioritizes progressive interpretations of events and policies, often selecting stories that illustrate systemic inequality, executive overreach, or corporate abuse. Sourcing is generally present but selectively framed, and opposing perspectives are often characterized dismissively rather than examined in depth.
Failed Fact Checks
- None in the Last 5 years
Overall, we rate UNFTR as left-biased due to its explicit progressive mission and advocacy-driven commentary. We rate it Mostly Factual because its work is generally grounded in real events and historical data, but conclusions are shaped by strong editorial bias, emotionally charged language, and selective presentation of evidence. (D. Van Zandt 01/25/2026)
Source: https://www.unftr.com/
Last Updated on January 25, 2026 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