• Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    4 months ago
    Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)

    Electronic Frontier Foundation is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.

    Bias: Left-Center
    Factual Reporting: High
    Country: United States of America
    Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/electronic-frontier-foundation/

    Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News


    Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
    Please consider supporting them by donating.

    Footer

    Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.

    Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
    If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.

    • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      4 months ago

      This shit is broke af. EFF is the most freedom of speech biased media there is.

        • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          35
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          EFF is very one-sided though. The do not give the other side as much praise.

          • glockenspiel
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            29
            ·
            4 months ago

            How do you mean “the other side?” EFF has a high factuality/credibility but is marked as left of center in bias.

            EFF, like ACLU, are mostly orgs that stick to their expertise. Look at entities rated as “Very High.” The climate science orgs don’t and shouldn’t give time entertaining the deranged conspiracy theories of science deniers, nor should EFF focus on advancing rhe worldviews of entities looking to limit speech on the internet. It would be like demanding AA set aside time at meetings to discuss the merits of getting black out drunk once in a while.

            Sure, many sides exist. But mere existence doesn’t make them equal.

          • tyler
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            4 months ago

            Factual reporting has nothing to do with “giving the other side …. praise”

          • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Why would they? The democrats are the only ones who care at all about net neutrality, online privacy, etc. The GQP are not at all aligned with their mission and values. The democrats generally are. And when they aren’t, the EFF has no issue shitting on those in Congress who are part of the problem. Party be damned.

            Bias is not inherently wrong or immoral. They aren’t even a media outlet. They are an advocacy group and they stick to the facts.

            • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              4 months ago

              Regardless if the other side is authoritarian or not, the EFF is very preferential and inclined in their reporting. Im not saying they’re wrong. In fact, they do great reporting. But it is biased reporting by definition.

          • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            The do not give the other side as much praise.

            Exactly what “other side” do you want to see represented?