The 8 Best Fact-Checking Sites for Finding Unbiased Truth
Whatsapp Pinterest
Advertisement

With deliberate misinformation campaigns and the continued prevalence of fake news, fact-checking sites are now more important than ever.

So in the digital era, where news travels quickly through multiple channels, how do you check your facts? Here are five of the best fact-checking websites, like Snopes and PolitiFact, so that you can find the truth.

1. Media Bias/FactCheck (MBFC News)

media bias fact check website

If you were wondering who is there to fact check the fact-checkers, that would be MBFC. From Palmer Report to Breitbart and even browser extensions like Newsguard, MBFC rates them all.

The website is a bias rating resource, with multiple fake news checking apps 5 Smart News Apps to Help You Avoid Fake News With More Trustworthy Reports 5 Smart News Apps to Help You Avoid Fake News With More Trustworthy Reports Want to get away from fake news? You can use these smart apps to get fact-checked and neutral news instead. Read More and extensions integrating these ratings into their own systems. The site’s reputation means that it has long been a resource that internet users can visit to check the bias in their favorite news websites.

MBFC not only includes reports on the bias of famous fact-checking websites like Snopes and PolitiFact but also publishes a daily source bias check. Factors that they consider include sourcing, biased wording, story choices, and political affiliation.

The site analyzes bias, transparency regarding funding sources, press freedom in the country of origin, and the site’s history of factual reporting. Failed fact-checks and instances of biased language are flagged in each site’s summary.

Finally, MBFC also has extensive lists on news sources with different biases (right, extreme, left, etc.). This includes lists of websites known for conspiracies, pseudoscience, and questionable sources. This helps users know which reports to take with a pinch of salt.

We’ve also included the MBFC News bias rating on each of the fact-checking sites on this list, excluding any sites that have been flagged as including bias.

2. Snopes

snopes reliable fact checking site

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

Is Snopes biased? According to MBFC, as well as other fact-checking sites, the answer is no.

Snopes started out as a site that mainly dealt with urban legends, myths, common misconceptions, and rumors. However, it has expanded to encompass general fact-checking of viral misinformation, including political statements.

Snopes has been accused of receiving funding from liberal billionaire George Soros. However, Snope’s disclosure page provides a summary of the website’s yearly expenditure and income. Its income is split between its GoFundMe campaign, advertising, its Facebook fact-checking partnership, reader contributions, and shareholder financing.

The website further states:

“We do not accept political advertising, nor do we accept any other form of funding from political parties, political campaigns, or political advocacy groups. We accept contributions directly from our readers and from non-partisan organizations to further our mission. The source of any single contribution we receive exceeding $10,000 or comprising more than 5% of our total annual revenue will be disclosed to the public.”

Meanwhile, FactCheck.org has put its weight behind Snopes; saying it is a reliable source and frequently citing the website in their own fact-checking articles.

3. PolitiFact

politifact check news website

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

PolitiFact is a non-partisan fact-checking website that focuses on political claims made in the US. This includes statements by politicians, political topics such as immigration, and general political news. A global edition of the site tackles stories from other parts of the world.

PolitiFact is a Pulitzer Prize-winning website and was acquired by the Poynter Institute in 2018—a reflection of the site’s commitment to truthful journalism.

The website has a few unique elements that make it stand out from other fact-checking websites. Firstly, there’s the Truth-o-Meter, which assesses the level of truth in a statement. This scale includes levels such as true, half true, mostly false, and even a “pants on fire” rating at the far end of the meter. The site even has an affiliated app called PolitiTruth that aims to test your political knowledge and susceptibility to fake news.

MBFC continues to rate PolitiFact as one of the most reliable, truthful fact-checking sites out there.

4. FactCheck.org

factcheck org website

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

Not only is FactCheck.org a fact-checking website with an established history of journalistic rigor, but it also partners with Facebook to combat viral fake news.

FactCheck is a non-partisan fact-checking website which focuses primarily on US politics. It is also a non-profit project—meaning it focuses on information, not the pursuit of profit.

Not only does the site regularly debunk politician claims and viral fake news, but it also lets users submit their own questions to the website.

5. TruthOrFiction.com

truthorfiction fact checking site

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

TruthOrFiction.com is one of the longest-running fact-checking sites out there. While it initially focused on looking at internet hoaxes and rumors, it has extended its range to include general fake news as well. This includes political stories and viral content.

The website gives stories various ratings to reflect their reliability. These include ratings such as true, fiction, unknown, decontextualized, or variations thereof. The analyses of rumors or stories look at the origins of these stories, whether there are elements of truth, and where stories may have gone astray (such as decontextualizing truth).

6. Lead Stories

lead stories check facts website

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

Lead Stories is a lesser-known website that helps users fact-check information. The website debunks fake news across a variety of beats, including entertainment, tech, politics, and international news.

The website also uses the Trendolizer search engine to monitor trending content—using these results to identify trending fake news. Depending on certain criteria, the site then debunks any trending hoaxes or false information using objective sources.

“Generally we will prioritize stories that are most trending or which are very new and which are gaining traction fastest. We might occasionally also tackle a story that has been debunked by another site already if we have more/better information. And if we receive a tip from a reader or spot an obvious hoax making the rounds on social media we might also decide to fact check and/or debunk it if it meets the above criteria,” Lead Stories explains in their methodology.

The site also partners with Facebook as part of the social network’s effort to combat fake news.

7. Hoax Slayer

hoaxslayer website for checking truth

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

Hoax Slayer is another reliable website that you can use to check out the latest online hoaxes. It focuses primarily on the type of hoaxes and misinformation shared on social media, such as Facebook scams, viral privacy policy hoaxes, phishing scams, and social network rumors.

The site mostly stays away from fact-checking politicians, considering there are a number of other sites that do this already. However, it does debunk certain fake news stories with a political agenda. One example includes debunking a WhatsApp message that claimed a billboard in Zimbabwe claimed white people can be killed in South Africa with no consequence, encouraging people to get in touch with South Africa’s ruling party to see how.

Hoax Slayer is also a much smaller website than others on this list, owned and run by Australian Brett M. Christensen. Despite this, the site has a stellar rating from MBFC for its factual reporting and neutrality.

8. FullFact.org

fullfact uk fact checking website

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

If you are looking for a UK-based fact-checking website, Full Fact is considered a reliable source and is endorsed by MBFC. The website is a fact-checking charity, with a diverse range of funding and transparency around income. They even make sure their Board of Trustees come from different sides of the political spectrum.

Full Fact also goes further than fact checks and even provides a fact-checking toolkit. The site also pushes for corrections from publishers when they publish incorrect or misleading information.

Fact-Checking Sites With Bias?

There are a few popular fact-checking websites that do receive high ratings for factual reporting but do not qualify for this list due to receiving a biased score on MBFC.

A few of these sites include:

  • Fact Checker by Washington Pos: Left-center bias
  • CheckYourFact: Right-center bias
  • FactMyth.com: Left-center bias
  • Zebra Fact Check: Right-center bias
  • ExposingTruth.com: Left-center bias

These biases emerge from the focal point of fact checks (such as fact-checking the right more than the left), or from the occasional use of loaded words to sway readers. While these websites do usually use credible sources, their focus indicates some level of bias.

How to Do Your Own Fact-Checking

While fact-checking websites will help you debunk myths and fake news, you should also aim to improve your own skills at spotting fake news. This will help you figure out the best ways to research topics, avoid confirmation bias, and learn which sites are not credible sources.

Have a look at our guide on how to avoid fake news How to Quickly Avoid Fake News During an Unfolding Crisis How to Quickly Avoid Fake News During an Unfolding Crisis Next time there's a crisis, don't fall for any hype. Cut through the social scams and the lies to find the truth with these tips. Read More for tips on spotting misinformation.

Explore more about: Fake News, .

Enjoyed this article? Stay informed by joining our newsletter!

Enter your Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Mark Speir
    October 13, 2019 at 10:36 pm

    Snopes is unbiased unless you happen to be a conservative satire site with a substantial Facebook presence...

  2. Jonde
    October 11, 2019 at 4:25 am

    All published events described as 'news' everywhere in the modern world are bent to suit what media owners and managers 'think incorrectly' that every person is gullible enough to believe the media articles of 10% truth and 90% fiction.
    Note that most articles contain the cop-out words, could, maybe, if, possibly, might, unless, and never use definitive words such as can, will, has, did and others.
    Add incorrect English words to the mix as Americans do in everyday language because an incorrectly spelled word can change the whole meaning of an article.

  3. GjohNcoe
    October 9, 2019 at 3:33 am

    You won't need any of these sites as long as you DO NOT watch Fox Hates & Lies entertainment TV for the factually/morally/mentally challenged.

  4. Moehead
    October 9, 2019 at 1:30 am

    There are lots of cognitive bias' at work here. The most egregious problem here is letting best be the enemy of good. No site will be perfect, but the author does an excellent job of giving us some places to start. Not one of the commenters offers their trusted source. Has it ever occurred to any of you that your perspective is not balanced? Where are your parents? lol

    • d cc
      October 9, 2019 at 12:23 pm

      Well said!

    • dragonmouth
      October 9, 2019 at 6:16 pm

      "Not one of the commenters offers their trusted source."
      I, for one, do not trust any sources. All news reporting and journalism is skewed and/or biased because all news reporters and journalists are biased by their life experiences. They may not realize it or admit it but they view facts through filters of their upbringing and experiences. Actually, so do all people. What people consider "unbiased" news/journalism is that which confirms their point of view. Anything that does not confirm their views or philosophy, people consider as "fake news".

  5. Mark
    October 8, 2019 at 7:03 pm

    SJWs ruin another website. Awesome.

  6. Mark
    October 8, 2019 at 6:56 pm

    Good god what a bunch of BS. Several of these sites are so overtly biased it's not even funny. Take this article down if you want to retain a shred of credibility.

    Snopes? Politifact? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    • Big Jim
      October 8, 2019 at 9:34 pm

      Kinda sucks when your made up facts are debunked by said sites...and he fact checking sites that rate the fact checking sites proves you are wrong. How do you like your made up reality now?

      • Bob
        October 10, 2019 at 4:45 am

        Unfortunately Mark is correct. Glenn Kessler, the Fact Checker for the Washington Post was interviewed on PBS a couple of years ago. He stated that all fact checking sites are biased per their political views, including his (although he said he is the least biased and does try to be fair). He also stated that the majority of Fact Checking sites are run, primarily, by Democrats and favor that party and the leftist view. Plus, since the MSM (most newspapers, networks and cable channels favor the Democratic party), their reporting will also be biased. Of course, any media which supports the Republican POV will also have bias to the right (essentially talk radio and Fox News). So as fact checking political situations, take them with a grain of salt (or better yet a good laxative so the misinformation can be flushed down the toilet).

        As for other fact checking, it depends on the topic (non-political). In most cases, they do a reasonable job, but there are instances where thy are flat wrong. I had my own personal experience with Snopes a few years back and where something I personally knew to be TRUE, they called FALSE and later included a news article to "back their claim". When I checked the article, it backed my claim and when I pointed it out, they not only pulled the reference but also blocked me from further communication. So much for fact checking and honesty.

  7. MAH
    October 2, 2019 at 1:59 am

    I wish you wouldn't use the term "fake news"; a made-up term by Donald Trump. Rather than forward that "right leaning" type of nomenclature, it would be more accurate to say "misinformation" or "inaccurate reporting" or even "untruths." You could even say "lies." But "fake news?" That's plainly a contradiction in terms.

    • xxx
      October 2, 2019 at 7:14 am

      trump did not invent the term fake news ffs...

    • Megan Ellis
      October 4, 2019 at 10:20 am

      Hi MAH :) The term "fake news" existed for a while before Trump started using it against his critics. It referred to deliberately incorrect news from websites that attempted to gain website clicks for ad revenue. It differed from factually incorrect reporting, biased articles or sensationalized reporting since it was essentially made up and deliberately incorrect.

    • Samantha
      October 7, 2019 at 1:35 pm

      You're using semantics, it's news, but it's fake, ergo, fake news.
      You really think no one used the term fake news before Trump? LOL

    • Mark
      October 8, 2019 at 6:59 pm

      Yeah, no.

      "Fake news" was coined by the Democrats, talking about Trump.

      I wonder if there exists a criticism of Trump that isn't actually true about Democrats. It doesn't really matter I guess, the sheep eat it all up anyway.

      And in actuality, Norm MacDonald was talking about fake news every Saturday a few decades ago.

      #WalkAway

      • James Frew
        October 9, 2019 at 9:45 am

        While you clearly have an interest in US politics, these sites also help navigate news in other countries too. You haven't offered evidence of their supposed bias, and you were the one to bring US politics up.

  8. John Smith
    October 1, 2019 at 12:18 pm

    Forgot to mention, you really suggest google search?
    Why not just suggest communist party USA or the DNC website and be done with it.
    Did you really miss all the backlash google got for their bias? They have been recorded on video bragging about censoring and about limiting search results, or de-listing sites they don't agree with.
    How can someone be this out of touch is and yet is publish articles on a web site that covers mostly technology is beyond me.
    Please do a minimal home work before publish stuff like this. This shows you are not ready for prime time in such topics.
    This is not a personal attack but a valid observation.

  9. dragonmouth
    September 30, 2019 at 6:30 pm

    This list is no better than the original list.

    Who has certified MBFC as "unbiased"?

  10. Warrior Princess
    September 24, 2019 at 10:39 am

    You are kidding me, right? This is a joke! MBFC is DEFINITELY lying! Every site they listed is nothing BUT biased! MFBC has just been added to the untrustworthy list.

    • Dad24
      October 7, 2019 at 7:26 pm

      Ahhh, poor little snowflake warrior. It's really a shame when all of your beliefs are shown to be nothing but right-wing propaganda.

      • Honkfather
        October 9, 2019 at 3:41 pm

        You do realise that the vast majority of media outlets and news websites are left leaning don't you? A research paper (from a prestigious university) was presented last year, plotting these outlets / sites on a graph from left to right.

  11. Al
    August 13, 2019 at 3:51 pm

    Snopes, gets their money, from facebook?
    Then it must be completely unbiased.
    Even though it is now proven, that facebook suppresses, conservatives and their posts.
    Of course, I believe them.
    After all, I have a garage full of rainbows and a bard full of unicorns.

  12. MW
    July 9, 2019 at 1:32 am

    The fact that you include you include Google, Snopes, and FactCheck means you have zero credibility. No one could be that stupid.

  13. db
    June 11, 2019 at 11:04 pm

    My humble modification to your list:
    -- Instead of a white bread google search; there is the customized Google search that MBFC promotes. It will only give you reliable news sources on the first run. On subsequent executions it can be asked for left or right leaning sites, OR to look for fact checks on the same subject/story.
    -- Since the Snopes lawsuit started, Snopes has been cash strapped. They have let the comments sections of their facebook page turn into a left wing echo chamber to generate facebook cash from likes, shares, engagement, followers, actions, previews, reach.... ect. In these last two years they have let their "factchecks" slip to the left to make themselves friendly to progressives who can donate to their crowd funding. Recently Snopes has been "checking" claims (from undefined places) about Republicans and conservatives that would be in and of themselves "True", but adding a specific addendum to them that make them false. This gives their now-progressive followers the good feeling of seeing conservative points being rated as less-than True, even though the untrue or unsubstantiated parts are not really connected. They have also been sometimes writing what amounts to Op/Ed pieces that don't check a claim, but instead report glowingly on things they feel are positive.
    -- Personally, I'd add CheckYourFact.com, which is a signatory and member in good standing of the International Fact Checking Network. For the last two months: Snopes has been on the "expired" list.

  14. Jennifer McBryde
    April 21, 2019 at 8:14 pm

    Any article listing Google and Snopes as a reliable fact checking source needs some actual fact checking. There is factual evidence and internal leaks proving both Google and Snopes filter out and misrepresent any republican, conservative or right wing facts. I myself have come across many circumstances of quotes being misrepresented and facts not reported in both Google and snopes.

  15. Janean
    December 28, 2018 at 7:24 pm

    I haven't tried some of those mentioned, but I have tried Google and fact check and can't seem to ever get a truthful bipartisan answer to my questions. After politely asking a simple question, that there was something I was confused about and wondered if they could help me. The first little bit of our conversation was nice and pleasant on both our parts, however the last response from the woman at fact check was a complete rant that didn't have anything to do with the conversation and was dishonest and rude. The next thing I knew was that that one response from her completely disappeared. How does that happen? If I hit that garbage can at the top of the page it will delete the entire conversation. And also if I delete it would only be on my email, I couldn't delete it from their email. So how did do that? Just a guess, from watching CSI ?, I would think only a computer hacker could do that. And why would she want just her rude response deleted out of the conversation?

  16. Nancy
    December 27, 2018 at 2:08 pm

    This should make you feel a bit foolish now that it has been revealed that politifact, snopes and even media bias have been found complicit

    • mark
      December 29, 2018 at 3:47 pm

      Sounds like conspiracy to me. Trying to reach an impartial verdict must be biased against some people.

      • John Smith
        October 2, 2019 at 4:10 am

        The fact that google, snopes, politificat and others openly admit left bias, makes people like you part of the problem.
        But then again, they rely on people like who would ignore that because you agree with their bias.

      • John Smith
        October 2, 2019 at 4:11 am

        Why was this comment censored?
        Let's try this again.

        This article should be listed under satire or partisan propaganda.
        Do you even bother to check your own sources?
        Or maybe you were no paying attention for the past 5 years or so.
        Let me make this easier.
        - Snopes: Discredited far left outlet. Their "writers" openly admit far left bias. Engulfed in several law suits, owner committed several border line felonies.
        - PolitiFact: An absolute disgrace. Hard to even call them legitimate website let alone fact checker.
        - FactCheck org - Same as snopes, but at least snopes admits left bias.

        The rest I don't even bother. You lost credibility after listing Snopes.

  17. Joe C.
    December 16, 2018 at 1:47 am

    I used to be a huge fan of lifehacker. Then their leftist social justice stuff ruined it. A site I visited multiple times a day was reduced to absolute zero. Makeuseof was a site I sought to replace the hole. Can't I just have one place where I can escape being told how shitty I am? How shitty half my nation is? Can't a site for tips and tricks on tech and hacking and fun stuff, just stay that way?

  18. David G.
    December 12, 2018 at 1:00 am

    Thank you for the list. Ironically, I know all of these quite well...except for MBFC. Stay strong and ignore all of the unintelligible comments from people who are on a mission to discredit those organizations which work tirelessly to check the many bogus and exaggerated claims made by our representatives. They will stop at absolutely nothing to try and discredit those who point out their lies.

  19. dragonmouth
    November 28, 2018 at 2:27 pm

    The five sites mentioned above are just as biased as any others. There are NO unbiased sites on the Internet. They all put their own spin on facts and truth. Whether a site (or any other source) is considered "biased" depends on whether it supports our specific views.

  20. Serefine
    November 24, 2018 at 1:28 pm

    I found your article very interesting but I do not agree with your choices of unbiased sites. Snopes and Fact check are very liberal and will never go against the left. I've asked questions where I knew the true answer and the two sites were totally out of wack. Facebook is also very liberal. If you post something against their party you get a warning that the material is offensive and could result in facebook jail. They also take away your share button on post against the left. How is it then, that you can post any thing you want against our current president and facebook does not step in with a warning.

  21. John Webb
    September 9, 2018 at 3:31 pm

    I use all of them regularly especially media bias fact checks. I deleted all the dodgy sites I was linked to on facebook thanks to them. It's a shame that more organizations like these don't exist though and you would think they would the way the world is these days with so much fake news coming from those who are usually the biggest complainers of it.
    I suspect most of the comments you will get from this article though will be from people who can't abide these sites as they disagree with the results they come up with and rather than learn from them they just attack the sources.

    • Deborah
      October 21, 2018 at 8:21 pm

      ALL these site are left leaning or downright left. ANYONE who thinks Universities are not left are not serious. they have liberals fact checking liberals.

  22. Shauna Johnstone
    September 7, 2018 at 12:27 pm

    Your bias shows in this article. You did not include for instance, truthorfiction.com which is quite reliable. Snopes has been debu nked many times. Their methods have been found wanting. For instance this article from 2008 published in US News, well before Trump ever was a factor is well worth reading. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2013/05/28/study-finds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans
    I guess your article proves that everyone sees what they want to see.

    • Megan Ellis
      September 7, 2018 at 3:30 pm

      Hi Shauna, I included sites that had a neutral rating from MBFC since it is an independent organization that is used as a measure of bias by other independent organizations like CivikOwl. I didn't include TruthOrFiction, since it tends to focus on hoaxes and internet rumors more than other fact-checking. Its site shows it also does fact checks much less frequently, with many front-page posts from July 2017. Its recent 2018 posts are based on fact-checking celebrity gossip and scams, rather than fact checks on current news. It's the only reason it wasn't on this list, since it does have a neutral bias rating, but it has a very specific scope of coverage. It's the same reason why HoaxSlayer isn't on this list -- it's also trustworthy, but its scope is limited.

      The article you mentioned is an opinion piece based on a study that showed that more Republican statements were found to be false by Politifact. The comment that this means it's biased was based on the opinion of the writer, just as others interpreted it as meaning that the party makes more false claims. Some say it's because the party is targeted by fact-checkers, while others say the party shares more falsehoods. This is why I used the MBFC rating, since it is peer-reviewed from people across the political spectrum (internet users and journalists alike) and is based on multiple checks rather than the opinion of an individual.

      • Rocster
        June 27, 2019 at 10:27 am

        And how do we know MBFC is truly neutral ?????? IT used to be the news was never as biased as today...... is there 6 conservatives that those on the right say ok they rep us and 6 libs/progressives on the left that both go over stories and say... ... yea/nay ? I doubt it..

        • Fact Checks R Us
          October 7, 2019 at 10:34 pm

          It's not that hard to learn to do it yourself if you actually want to, and then check back to see how much your findings and the fact checking site's agree. However, you have to be a true independent who fact checks everyone and reads enough on all sorts of sites to be able to pick up on the slant of any site by reading one article. Getting that mindset IS difficult if you don;t have it already.

        • Bob
          October 10, 2019 at 5:04 am

          I agree. Of course, you would probably end up never getting the real facts, even if you added 6 independents to the mix as they are bound to also have a bias.

          As for "Fact Check R Us" reply, I would agree except for the fact that not only web sites that deal with news excerpts, but others also tend to be biased. Yahoo is a great example as I have yet to see it show anything positive about President Trump (and his family - wife and youngest son) - only negative - but when Obama was president, you never saw anything negative about him or his family. They also showed favoritism to the Democratic/left-leaning sites in giving them a "higher ranking" in displaying their opinions. Yahoo isn't the only guilty party. The social media sites have also been caught filtering conservative POV.

    • Deborah
      October 21, 2018 at 8:23 pm

      I agree they use Facebook use of them to censor Conservatives.

  23. dragonmouth
    September 6, 2018 at 8:43 pm

    "5. Google Search"
    ROTFLMAO!
    Google one of the 5 best unbiased?! Next joke! Just the fact that Google sells better placement location in their searches makes those searches biased.

    How many SEO tools are out there to optimize (improve) search results?

    • Megan Ellis
      September 7, 2018 at 3:38 pm

      Hi Dragonmouth

      Thanks for your comment. Google Search places any paid-for search results under the ads section, separate from organic search results.

      SEO manipulation definitely exists, especially when it comes to companies trying to bury bad publicity. But that's why I mentioned that you need to take results with a pinch of salt considering that untrustworthy results can show up among trustworthy results. Unfortunately, no fact-checking site contains all the answers to any question you may have, which is why a search engine is sometimes needed. For example, that Trump meme which shows a fake quote from a fake article calling Republican voters dumb is quickly debunked through a Google search which shows multiple reputable news organizations mentioning that it's a false quote. It is also debunked on Snopes, but requires specific wording ("fake Trump quote" doesn't work, but "dumb republicans" does).

      All-in-all, a search engine is where you'll find the biggest variety of sources, the ability to check if a claim is backed up by multiple trustworthy organizations, and anything that may refute a claim. But it requires the searcher to take a good look at the results :)