Does factually have a left leaning bias as most media sources are left leaning
Executive summary
There is no evidence in the supplied reporting that directly assesses the organization "Factually," so a definitive claim that Factually has a left-leaning bias cannot be supported from these sources; the available material instead describes third‑party media‑bias rating tools and their methods, which show how one would evaluate any outlet (including Factually) but do not itself rate that outlet [1] [2] [3]. The sources make clear that media‑bias charts and fact‑checking sites attempt systematic ratings but also carry their own methodological choices and potential agendas that users should weigh [2] [1] [3].
1. What the reporting actually covers: maps and methods, not a Factually audit
The documents provided focus on media‑bias resources — Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC) explains its multi‑factor methodology and recent changes to scoring [1], Ad Fontes Media publishes the Media Bias Chart and describes its “rigorous, reproducible methodology” and placement choices [2] [4], and academic and library guides point readers to bias charts and fact‑checking resources rather than evaluating a single site [5] [6] [7]. None of these excerpts contains a direct rating, review, or mention of an outlet named “Factually,” so the supplied corpus cannot itself state whether Factually leans left or right [1] [2] [3].
2. How third‑party rating systems decide bias and why that matters to the question
Media Bias/Fact Check says it assesses political bias through wording, sourcing, choice of stories and political affiliation and reports factualness on a seven‑point scale; it also documents updates to methodology and data inputs such as web traffic [3] [1]. Ad Fontes Media places outlets on an X (left–right) and Y (reliability) axis using trained analyst teams and publishes methodology materials; their November–January chart releases and writeups emphasize that placement is a function of judged content and reliability rather than an absolute truth [2] [4]. Those methodological descriptions show that determining whether any outlet — including Factually — is “left leaning” requires systematic content analysis, not an offhand claim [3] [2].
3. Why claims that “most media sources are left leaning” need context and scrutiny
Several guides and libraries warn that bias maps and charts are interpretive tools, not definitive verdicts, and that “all news is biased” in some form, so readers should use multiple resources to “get the full picture” [7] [8]. Academic and library resources recommend comparing how different outlets cover the same story and using multiple bias/methodology sources [5] [6]. This cautions against a blanket assertion that “most media sources are left leaning” without citing which dataset or chart is the basis for that generalization [7] [8].
4. Hidden agendas and limits: rating sites themselves are not neutral
The reporting explicitly notes potential conflicts and procedural choices: MBFC describes methodology changes and the use of SimilarWeb traffic data, which are editorial choices that affect outcomes [1], and Ad Fontes acknowledges its chart is necessarily selective and interpretive when placing outlets on the grid [2]. Wikipedia’s summary of MBFC also highlights that ratings combine objective measures and subjective analysis and that inter‑rater agreement has been measured in academic work — underscoring both credibility and the role of judgment in producing bias labels [3].
5. Practical conclusion and next steps a researcher should take
Because the supplied sources do not evaluate an outlet named Factually, the answer must be: this dataset cannot confirm that Factually has a left‑leaning bias; to reach that determination, one should run a systematic comparison using established tools (e.g., Ad Fontes, MBFC, AllSides and library guides) and inspect methodology notes and sample content, since the rating depends on criteria such as wording, sourcing, story selection and editor choices that these sources describe [2] [1] [3] [7]. The supplied reporting supports how to evaluate bias but does not supply a direct verdict on Factually itself [2] [1].