globalresearch.ca

Key factors

• − Conspiracy theory promotion — Consistent pattern of publishing unfounded conspiracy narratives and fringe geopolitical theories without robust fact-checking
• − Lack of editorial standards — No transparent corrections policy, minimal editorial oversight, and weak separation between opinion and reporting
• − Ideological bias — Strong anti-Western, anti-mainstream-media stance that shapes content selection and framing rather than evidence-based reporting
• • Longevity — Operating since 2001 provides some institutional continuity, but does not indicate credibility
• − Third-party assessment — Rated as low-credibility by independent media bias/reliability trackers

Editorial standards

Global Research lacks professional editorial standards. There is no transparent corrections policy, no clear fact-checking process, and minimal editorial review. The site publishes contributed articles with minimal verification. No formal distinction is maintained between reporting and opinion. Funding sources are not transparently disclosed. The publication operates more as a platform for anti-establishment commentary than as a news organization with professional journalism practices.

Fact-checking

Global Research has been repeatedly flagged by fact-checkers for promoting unverified claims. Snopes, PolitiFact, and Media Bias/Fact Check have documented instances of false or misleading content. The site has no formal retraction process and does not systematically correct errors. Major fact-checking organizations classify it as a low-credibility source.