The 8 Best Fact-Checking Sites for Finding Unbiased Truth

Megan Ellis Updated 08-12-2019

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 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, rumors, and conspiracy theories Top 9 Conspiracy Web Sites Conspiracies refuse to die away even in this day and age. Here are the top conspiracy forums and conspiracy websites out there. Read More . 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, 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.


factcheck org website

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased

Not only is 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.


truthorfiction fact checking site

MBFC News Rating: Least Biased 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.


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
  • Left-center bias
  • Zebra Fact Check: Right-center bias
  • 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 10 Tips to Avoid (Spreading) Fake News During a Crisis Here's how to avoid fake news and how you can stop spreading fake news on social media. Read More for tips on spotting misinformation.

Affiliate Disclosure: By buying the products we recommend, you help keep the site alive. Read more.

Whatsapp Pinterest

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

  1. Patricia Nezi
    June 2, 2020 at 12:17 pm

    You should be including SNOPES as a very biased fact checker!

  2. Arlene Baker
    March 17, 2020 at 10:59 pm

    You left out the organization FAIR - Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. They do good work as well.

  3. Alan
    March 1, 2020 at 4:51 pm

    This article causes me to question the world-view bias of both this article and MBFC. Although usually relatively reliable, SNOPES has been caught red-handed on multiple occasions of a left-tilt in its analyses.

    One of the fact-check sites that I used to rely on and often referred others to was, "" I went there from this article and the lead item was about the born-alive protection bill, which did not make its cloture vote, despite having some bi-partisan support. The site listed the arguments for the bill as "False," quoting only sites with a strong left-leaning bias and those who would face financial penalties if it were to be passed. This saddens me as I was under the impression that it was still a good site to go to and does not seem to be any longer.

    They quoted a Democratic talking point that allowing born children to die was already against the law, hence no further legislation was required. They stated that only about 1% of all abortions were at a gestational period where a child might be born alive, inferring that the law was not needed thereby supporting their claims of falsehood.

    However, even though a law exists, it has no teeth (required penalties) and therefore is summarily ignored in many places. The 1% quoted is 1% of a very large number (Millions of cases per year), which in itself is not trivial. Therefore the adjudication of "False" is absolutely wrong, as many children that are born alive currently have no protection and perish.

  4. Vinny
    February 27, 2020 at 6:24 pm

    I don’t believe Snopes for a second! They’ve been proven to be wrong time after time and have admitted to not fact-checking things at all. I’ll try some others though...

  5. Rachel
    February 19, 2020 at 6:30 am

    I can tell you with 100% certainty than snopes is one of the biased sites. I know this because someone posted something from snopes to try and say that Donald Trump did not say something on a video of him saying it, and multiple other places have shown him saying it. As for the Washington Post, I know that they do not make up stories because one of the ones that run it stopped someone from making up stories in the past.

    • I hope I'm wrong
      June 4, 2020 at 4:47 am

      Are you sure that isn't just an example of how the subtle manipulation of your opinion isn't even noticeable to you?
      I'm left wing and from the UK.. I've never read the Washington Post in my life until today, and erm according to this, it has a left wing centre bias... Yet the article was saying about 10 great things Trump has done for the USA.. Again, I don't pay any attention to the man... So my view is/was formed by the shouty people on my FB... Who of course are all also left wing... The difference now... I got rid of FB and called myself an Anarchist... Because the left and right are both insane, yet neither can see it

  6. Fritz Bayerlein
    February 8, 2020 at 5:28 am

    For a good number of laughs read the comments by the Trumpists, wing-nuts, cuckoos, cranks, crackpots & so-called 'conspiracy theorists'.
    The sites that they hate and fear indicate which ones you should trust the most.

  7. Charles Greene
    January 28, 2020 at 11:14 pm

    The moment you said Snopes was not biased, you proved you are.

    • Bob E
      February 8, 2020 at 12:43 am

      Your list omitted FOX (i.e., faux) news!

      • Dori Alexander
        May 15, 2020 at 1:58 am

        Bob E, how would you know? You've never tuned in to be proven wrong.

  8. Fritz B
    January 26, 2020 at 12:39 pm

    Wow, lots of terrified right-wing deniers here. Amazing how many people's brains have been turned into cottage cheese by Faux News, which is not a news channel at all, but an opinion and entertainment channel. And of course a right-wing Goebbels-type propaganda platform.
    The lack of critical thinking in many of these comments just boggles the mind. This is what happens when they don't teach civics in school anymore and the kids sleep through history class.
    Take a deep breath, boys & girls, and leave the thinking to the grownups.

    • Roland
      February 7, 2020 at 2:00 pm

      Odd, somehow my cottage-cheese brain has been able to assist me in earning a BA in Arabic, teaching myself the Greek language while living in Greece, becoming a Senior Cryptanalyst, teaching myself a couple of programming languages and earning an MA in Writing from a program where only 30% of the initially accepted applicants graduate. The one thing my cottage-cheese brain has never done is told me to vote for a liberal. Because THAT would be just plain old stupid. BTW, what was going on in Europe 400 years before The Crusades?

      • Brian
        February 7, 2020 at 3:14 pm

        Bahahahahahahaha! Liberals actually think that they are smarter and have the "moral high-ground". The sad thing is that most of them are too simple-minded to understand just how wrong they are. The second that you show them they are wrong and they have no valid response.
        You're instantly called a racist, homophobe, hillbilly, rube, or some other personal attack. The sad thing is when the socialists finally get their way, they will find out just how dumb they really are.

        And, just to comment on the list above... BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I seriously doubt there was any actual research done there other than the Google search: "Fact-Checking Sites".

      • paul
        February 8, 2020 at 3:54 am

        Wow. You really do have a cottage cheese brain. All those accomplishments that you cite are wonderful, but clearly none contributed to your ability to reason. Voting for a conservative would be just plain old stupid, and even worse, immoral.

      • Brian Boru
        February 10, 2020 at 2:46 pm

        "what was going on in Europe 400 years before The Crusades?"
        Christianity was spreading.
        Why do you ask?

      • Marjorie
        February 24, 2020 at 4:23 pm

        Great rebuttal!

      • Patricia Nezi
        June 2, 2020 at 12:23 pm

        Love your "intelligent" comment for all those liberals, especially Fritz, who have no facts.

    • I hope I'm wrong
      June 4, 2020 at 4:52 am

      Can I just say, that as a 40 year old man who has been left wing all his life... This very mentality is the reason why the left has disintegrated as a political force in the western world, and it's terrifying.... I always thought it would be the anger and ingornace of the right that brought about a race war... Not of the left.... Who'd have guessed that shouting in people's faces and calling them stupid would have caused Brexit, Trump, Boris? It's almost as if had you actually talked with them in a civilised way, you might have got them onside. Instead it's childish abuse and then the mirror image of the far right thugs in the form of Antifa hijacking peaceful movements and horrific murders to further their agenda... The world has gone mental in lockdown and I'm not playing politics anymore.... Everyone just reacts and throws words and insults. People are truly embarrassing in their ability to fail to control their emotional reactions 🤦‍♂️

    January 25, 2020 at 6:10 am

    if you live in the states and you get your news from less than 3 different sources then you're probably getting news that has a good spin on it. if you only watch one news station, it used to be possible to get relatively unbiased news but that is far from true any more.

    • Brian Boru
      February 10, 2020 at 2:49 pm

      "if you live in the states and you get your news from less than 3 different sources then you're probably getting news that has a good spin on it"

      I live in US and do fine with just one news source and one analysis-opinion source. The key of course is that neither are USA sources.

    January 25, 2020 at 6:06 am

    I'm a historian and believe me when I say our current era is by no means unique in the proliferation of b.s. and the day's news sources being biased. Hitler and his Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, did not pull of the holocaust because the country was already anti-semitic. It took a couple of decades of just pumping anti-semitic propaganda to the populace via every media channel. Controlling the information people have access to is one way to homogenize the people's beliefs. People and governments have been aware of this for a long time. If want to research something or be able to feel secure in your beliefs, you have to do your own homework. AND you have to recognize the environment that you will be doing your search within. It will take time and effort but peace of mind isn't cheap. Or you could just be lazy and turn on the news...

  11. Geoz
    January 13, 2020 at 4:51 pm

    In spite of the conservative effort of commenters to stop Snopes, it is a reliable source just as the article said. They take on liberals as well, but lately with the conservatives in power, they have gone after Snopes, but never with any additional information, only accusation. And that is reflected in the comments in this page. As Isaac Asimov noted years ago, the strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” Snopes deserves to be on the list

    • Saul
      January 14, 2020 at 8:16 pm

      I have found Snopes to be totally left leaning on many occasions. I'm beginning to believe that my search for a truly unbiased fact checking site is an impossible dream. Independent research is probably the best solution - try to assemble as many facts as you can from the original sources, review, and decide for yourself. But it's still a crap-shoot. Even direct 'in the room at the time' witnesses have been known to get the details wrong.

      • Steve
        February 5, 2020 at 7:52 pm

        Snopes is awful . It oozes left wing bias. You can see them struggling to de-bunk the myth that Trump stole donations to war veterans.

      • Rachel
        February 19, 2020 at 6:34 am

        Snopes supports Trump 100%. I have seen where it has said that Trump did not say something that there was video of him saying it.

      • I hope I'm wrong
        June 4, 2020 at 5:01 am

        It's funny how the right think something is left bias, and the left think something is right bias... Same in the UK with the BBC... Its almost like social media has created 2 totally soerate realities that don't actually reflect what the actual reality is anymore.. And there's constant nonsense as a result.

  12. John
    January 5, 2020 at 4:48 pm

    You need to fact-check your fact-checking article! Snopes is not biased? As soon as I read that I knew that I can't believe anything the author of this article is saying. In fact I will probably just disregard any non-technical article from MUO in the future since you just seem to regurgitate facts without checking them yourself. If you're going to take the time to write an article, do it right and put some time and effort into it.

    • Pete
      January 13, 2020 at 5:57 pm

      Great! Until you write your article, complete with sources, we'll just presume that you are another subscriber to the trump regime's false claims!

      • john
        January 18, 2020 at 7:01 pm

        Feeling a little "biased" today? LMAO

  13. Frank J
    January 2, 2020 at 7:04 pm

    Here is a simple fact... Roger Ailes had an idea for a biased GOP news network in the 70's. Nixon embraced the idea, saying he and his supporters needed "our own news" from a network that would lead "a brutal, vicious attack on the opposition." Ailes realized his dream decades later, with Australian Rupert Murdoch's money. Fox News provides an alternative reality to the so-called "fake news," providing daily talking points to Republican elected officials and policing them the way a sheepdog does its flock. And Fox viewers, it's been proven, know less about political facts than people not viewing any news at all.

    • Nora Simon
      January 22, 2020 at 11:04 pm

      Sweetie, please provide a citation for your claims. LOL, hon, the comically self-unaware pompous condescension exposes that you made those *facts* up out of thin air. Nothing of what you say comports know...facts.

      • Theophilus Thistle
        February 2, 2020 at 3:29 am

        It is so obvious that Fox is biased, which makes your response, Nora, ridiculous. Try reading some newspapers and listening to other sources than Faux News, dear.

  14. Kent Nielsen
    January 2, 2020 at 2:20 pm

    As soon as you said Snopes is not biased, I knew your article was fake snopes is very biased, how can you tell? the more times they say they are not biased, the more biased they are. So I have to discount everything else stated in your article.

  15. Michael Welge
    December 13, 2019 at 3:18 am

    No, Media Bias/FactCheck DOES NOT rate them all. In point of fact, it is very limited in the number of sources checked, not listing several MAJOR fact check sites and asking subscribers to help them, since they are unable to rate them all. For you to rate it #! is a major disservice to your readers.

    • Tommie Jayne Wasserberg
      January 12, 2020 at 9:55 pm

      MBFC 's owner has some pretty serious personal biases that came out in an email exchange when i protested his rating of 21st Century Wire because of a conspiracy posting from years ago.

  16. Will
    December 3, 2019 at 9:29 pm

    Snopes is a mouthpiece of the LEFT. Something like 12 out of 13 of their so-called "fact checkers" are left-wingers. Most of the rest of the sites in this list are also left wing sites. MediaBiasFactCheck is one of the few honest, non-partisan sites. NewsBusters is another good site.

  17. Hunter
    October 15, 2019 at 2:03 am

    Your #2 is totally bias !

  18. Mark
    October 14, 2019 at 4:56 pm

    Hahahaha this is so ridiculously bad that it's funny.

    If you are looking for truth, do NOT visit most of these sites. The majority are hopelessly biased and engage in blatant lying or, very commonly, it's true BUT...

    All a person needs is a brain, an open mind and a huge mistrust of media to find out the truth.

    Seriously, Snopes? Politifact? LOLOLOLOLOL

    • Nony
      October 15, 2019 at 7:22 pm

      Betcha I can guess what "news" outlets you trust.

    • James Frew
      October 17, 2019 at 9:20 am

      Do you have evidence that Snopes is, in fact, biased?

      • sl0j0n
        January 2, 2020 at 7:16 pm

        Hello, Mr. Frew;
        Check "Snopes" 'claim' RE: Paul Pelosi JR & Ukraine.
        Pelosi's own company's video proves he was involved in VISCOIL.
        "Snopes" is just more political propaganda.
        Have a GREAT day, Neighbor!

  19. Ray
    October 14, 2019 at 3:36 pm

    Once again, another out of date article. Did you miss your deadline or something? Is this the second or third time now???

    I would imagine that everything you said has changed by now. Facts are something of the past, I think, although that seems to be changing too. Recorded History, as well as the recorded Present, is changing every moment. Before long, we won't have a clue about real history or real truth. Look at what people are willing to believe now. Some people are not bashful about wanting to change history either.... or the truth, and some do. One can find any position that aligns with theirs and it's not hard to do. Remember Encyclopedias (for those of us over 50)? We believed everything we read and we taught it in schools. Would you now look in an encyclopedia from 1960 for answers? Would you trust your high school books from 1960 to be totally true? Yet, that's what was taught. Now, most people will "gOOgle" the answer and believe what they read, or should I say, what gOOgle whats you to read. So, the bottom line is........who do YOU really believe? and..... are YOU sure & do YOU care? and..... WHO really built the pyramids?? That's what I want to know. Are you listening out there??????

    • James Frew
      October 17, 2019 at 9:21 am

      What about this article do you feel is out of date, Ray?

  20. 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...

    • James Frew
      October 17, 2019 at 9:21 am


  21. 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.

  22. Michael Chalk
    October 10, 2019 at 2:56 am

    There's a couple of good ones in Australia as well...

    1) the ABC partnered with RMiT Uni to restart their fact-check service:

    2) The Conversation, where journalists support academics to share research findings more accessibly:

    (How did we get to this place, where there is so little trust between opposing perspectives? A widening chasm, and so much hatred for people with different opinions and beliefs...

    (I guess it's always been like this, we've had wars over different beliefs in the past, over cultural differences.. if only we could get forward to a new land of mutual respect and curiosity)

  23. 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.

    • Gamewriter
      October 12, 2019 at 12:18 am

      I disagree. After discovering an inaccurate story at myself, I looked it up at, which stated, "Overall, we rate Newsweek Left Biased based on story selection that favors the left and Mixed for factual reporting due to multiple failed fact checks by IFCN fact checkers." (I think IFCN is The International Fact-Checking Network)
      Generally, conservative sites publish more fake news, but liberal sites are also often inaccurate.

    • Mark
      October 14, 2019 at 4:57 pm

      You sound super smart

      • Nony
        October 15, 2019 at 7:23 pm

        Hmm somehow I figured you would take offense to the Mark.

    • Frank
      October 14, 2019 at 9:58 pm


  24. 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".

      • Nony
        October 15, 2019 at 7:25 pm

        I bet you spend a lot of time on youtube, don't you?

      • Maryon Jeane
        February 11, 2020 at 3:53 pm

        Gosh, Dragonmouth - I never thought I'd be agreeing with you for once...

        I think the best prophylactic against fake news (as in - as Dragonmouth says - news from any one source) is to know a reasonable amount of history and to read constantly, widely, and well. Properly researched books, written after the event and by different authors with differing perspectives, are an excellent counterbalance to 'rolling news, every hour, on the hour' and all that.

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

    SJWs ruin another website. Awesome.

  26. 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.


    • 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.

        • Frank
          October 14, 2019 at 10:42 pm

          So wrong Bob. For 40+ years broadcast news is all for profit, therefore right leaning. Over 90% of talk is billionaire owned, therefore right. Rupert Murdoch is a billionaire, an Australian with enormous influence with his cult station. Controversy equals profit . What is more controversial than an insane president and party backing him. And define 'leftist view'. All Dems are farther right than Eisenhower and even Nixon at times. Bottom line, the media is making billions and the billionaire owners don't want to pay taxes. Therefore 90% of all media supports the Republican party.

      • Mark
        October 14, 2019 at 4:58 pm

        Ya, OK Big Jim. LOL

  27. VLDvo
    October 8, 2019 at 2:23 pm

    Good grief! I really do not believe that there are any reliable sources that fact check anymore. I do not trust any of the sources stated, nor do I trust any of the news organizations. It does make it hard to find out what is really going on, but then when you have so many spouting their garbage, you will never get the real story anyway.

    What happened to being impartial and just telling the facts and only the facts? I do not want your opinion when I am trying to find the facts about serious news event that may effect my life? I think they have gone the way of the dodo bird...

  28. 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.


      • 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.

        • Mark
          October 14, 2019 at 5:05 pm


          These sites are in the US and are centered on US politics, and I'm in the US. What exactly is your point?

          This is a tech site that should have nothing to do with politics yet they are pushing political fact-checking sites that are anything but. They are, for the most part, propaganda. Nothing I say nor any evidence I present will change your mind that I'm wrong--why should I bother?

        • James Frew
          October 17, 2019 at 9:26 am

          I think you summed things up well at the end there.

          "Nothing I say nor any evidence I present will change your mind that I'm wrong--why should I bother?"

          Yet. You appear to be spending a lot of time in these comments making, so far as you've presented them baseless claims without any evidence. Feel free to continue, but, as you say, you are unlikely to change anyone's mind.

      • Nony
        October 15, 2019 at 7:28 pm

        Donald Trump is doing a bang-up job of demonstrating every way the GOP are complete and utter hypocrites. Sure, the Dems are often hypocritical too, but Donald Trump is literally everything the Republican Party has claimed to hate for decades, and now people like you worship him.

  29. 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.

    • Fact Checks R Us
      October 7, 2019 at 10:30 pm

      John SMith, Interesting you should promote a conspiracy theory in a comment to an article about fact checking. I actually took a few minutes to see what I could find on the topic, just to check myself on what I recalled about it and find if something new had been reported, and found quite a number of such claims from rather conservative sources...including, of course, fale potus Trump and his inability to understand algorithms...and a guy named Epstein who had no problem with Google until his site started infecting user's computers and Google put uo a warning as is SOP. Hrmmmmm.

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

    This list is no better than the original list.

    Who has certified MBFC as "unbiased"?

    • Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)
      October 31, 2019 at 3:21 pm


      MB/FC uses subjective means of generating its ratings. It's not the place to start for an objective look at fact-checking sources.

  31. 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.

        • Frank
          October 14, 2019 at 10:44 pm

          Honkfather- According to the cult Faux news. There is no research paper.

  32. 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.

  33. 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.

  34. 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, 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.

  35. 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.

  36. 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?

  37. 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.

  38. 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?

  39. 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.

  40. 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.

  41. 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.

  42. 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.

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

    Your bias shows in this article. You did not include for instance, 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.
    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.

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

    "5. Google Search"
    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 :)

      • George Wallace
        October 16, 2019 at 1:19 pm

        Hi Megan,

        I am curious. Are you registered to vote? If so are you registered as a Democrat, Republican or something else? Who did you vote for in the last Presidential election? Have you contributed financially to a political party or a politician? If so, which party or politician? I will appreciate your honest answers and I suspect that the other readers of this article you wrote will too. Thank you.