100 Percent Fed Up has not amassed the reputation of credible news sources like mainstream media outlets despite its decades-long popularity in conservative circles. On its website, the blog states, “We take our credibility very seriously and have spent years building a reputation for delivering honest news to our readers,” and aims to correct any errors made. However, it has repeatedly faced accusations of publishing false information and spreading conspiracies.
At Biasly, we endeavor to evaluate the accuracy and dependability of all media outlets. Let us investigate the reliability and accuracy of 100 Percent Fed Up.
Does Reliability Matter?
Reliability, in general, refers to how trustworthy or accurate information, or in this case, a news source is. If we consider this definition, it quickly becomes clear why reliability is important in media sources. If we can’t trust the things we read then there isn’t much of a point in continuing to consume content from that source, after all. So how exactly can we gauge the reliability of a news source anyways?
There are several potential measures of reliability to look out for when trying to determine whether a media source is reliable or not. Red flags for an unreliable article can include the presence of wild unsubstantiated claims, facts dependent on other unreliable sources, heavy use of opinionated language, and more. Some indicators of a reliable news source, on the other hand, include things like:
- Absence of subjective/opinionated language in articles
- Credible sources cited (e.g., neutral sources, .gov, .edu websites)
- Facts and statistics backed by multiple relevant outside sources
- Use of primary sources when possible (e.g., interviews, quotes)
- Information that remains consistent across news sources
How Does 100 Percent Fed Up Fare in its Reliability?
The political reliability index developed by Biasly objectively assesses news organizations’ accuracy and trustworthiness. 100 Percent Fed Up’s overall Reliability Score has been rated as ‘Fair’ by Biasly. This score is an average of the Fact Analysis Score and the Source Analysis Score, each evaluating separate components of the source’s Reliability. However, due to the fact that 100 Percent Fed Up doesn’t have a Fact Analysis Score, the reliability rating of ‘Fair’ is entirely based on its Source Analysis computed by our AI algorithms as seen below:
100 Percent Fed Up’s Source Analysis Score is ‘Fair,’ which suggests readers can trust some of the sources, links, and quotes provided by the news source. This score, which is based on A.I., focuses on assessing the quality of sources and quotes used including their number, lengths, uniqueness, and diversity.
However, since these scores are based on percentages and averages, individual articles could be more or less trustworthy depending on the context, author, and other factors. Our findings show that 100 Percent Fed Up is a semi-reliable news source. Some of the information in their articles are factual, but they frequently contain a lot of holes that do not tell the full story along with multiple instances where the authors made inaccurate claims.
Let us analyze the supporting data for 100 Percent Fed Up’s rankings and discuss what to watch out for while searching for trustworthy news sources.
100 Percent Fed Up Accuracy and Reliability
Selection bias is when stories and facts are selected or deselected, often on ideological grounds, to create a narrative in support of the new sources’ ideology. Omission bias, on the other hand, is when different opinions and political views regarding a situation are left out so that the reader is only exposed to the ideological perspective supported by the author. It’s important to keep in mind these two types of biases when trying to assess an article’s level of accuracy.
Biasly assigns a percentage score to accuracy, with one being the least accurate and 100 being the most. Ratings are calculated by weighing assertions with supporting evidence, the number of reliable internal sources, and the number of reliable external sources employed. A full page at Biasly’s website includes dependability and accuracy ratings for newly released 100 Percent Fed Up news stories. As we previously stated, according to the reports analytics have assessed, 100 Percent Fed Up has a Fair reliability score. This score can vary from article to article, though, and the most extreme variations in dependability are caused by bias, notably omission, and selection bias.
To provide an example of a source from the other side of the aisle, let’s briefly examine Mother Jones. The progressive magazine has a Medium Liberal bias rating with a Good overall reliability score. One article, “How Flint Closed the Gap Between Black and White Suffering Under COVID,” has a perfect reliability score partially because of its low bias score. Another article, “Watch: Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene Combine Forces at a Rally in Florida,” has a significantly higher liberal bias score and is therefore rated as semi-reliable. As a result, stories displaying political leaning are less reliable than neutral ones.
For instance, this 100 Percent Fed Up article, “Report Claims Biden Administration Gave Ukraine Permission To Strike Inside Russia Using U.S. Weapons,” is rated as Somewhat Conservative but is relatively close to the center. The author, Danielle, relies on some reputable sources, such as Politico and Reuters, to inform the reader about the Biden Administration approving Ukraine’s use of U.S. weapons in its ongoing war with Russia. However, she was also selective in including reactions from right-wing outlets, such as Unity News Network and conservative influencers. Meanwhile, she excluded reactions from those who support the Biden Administration or Ukraine. Showing only one side denies the reader a more holistic view of the issue. Therefore, the article is semi-reliable.
We will take a closer look at more examples like this below, providing a further investigation into the reliability of 100 Percent Fed Up’s articles. This will include its use of selection bias, omission bias, and the quality of its sources and facts used.
Analysis of Reliability in 100 Percent Fed Up Opinion Pieces
Opinion-style journalism is a suitable venue for reporters to express their opinions and beliefs, even if excessive opinion might be something to avoid while producing a general news article. Although opinion pieces are less trustworthy because they are subjective, they can still be worthwhile reading to increase one’s understanding of various political viewpoints.
100 Percent Fed Up’s opinions have led to reliability issues with their tendency to push a conservative agenda over honest journalism. Their commitment to their agenda has caused controversies, such as promoting harmful conspiracies such as anti-vax messages and election denialism. For example, the article, “NFL Hall Of Famer Larry Allen ‘Dies Suddenly’ At 52,” may initially come off as reliable. However, the author used phrases such as “Died suddenly,” and associated it with the COVID-19 vaccine to push the belief that the vaccine is lethal. They go on to share other recent stories of people who “died suddenly,” and similar conspiracies regarding COVID-19 treatments. The blog’s commitment to conservative and pro-Trump agenda, superseded their publications of truth and fact to appease their primarily conservative audience.
Quality of Sources and Facts Used
100 Percent Fed Up has a mixed record when it comes to using reputable sources. Sometimes it cites mainstream outlets and other times it will reference sources similar to itself. An example that includes both is the article, “Donald Trump Sentencing Date Announced Following Verdict.” In this article, the author only included six quotes, but each was a lengthy statement or excerpt. Longer quotes can indicate higher reliability if the source is reputable.
In addition to that, the author also referenced 4 sources, which are as follows:
- WLTReport (conservative-leaning)
- The Hill (center)
- CNBC (center-left)
- Donald Trump (conservative-leaning)
The number of sources are fairly diverse, but generally lean conservative. The authors frequently quote excerpts from the original sources and include a hyperlink.
“‘President Donald J. Trump has been convicted by a Manhattan jury for falsifying business records in connection with the Stormy Daniels so-called ‘hush money’ situation, marking the first time a U.S. president has been found guilty of a felony,’ WLTReport noted.”
Most of the information quoted from other sources is accurates, but the blog’s authors tend to treat all quotes as equally credible. For example, they share Donald Trump’s reaction to his conviction but do fact-check his statements.
“‘This was a rigged, disgraceful trial. The real verdict is going to be Nov. 5 by the people, and they know what happened here and everybody knows what happened here,’ Trump said.”
The former president’s comments about the trial being rigged are inaccurate. Not providing any fact-checking and putting such statements alongside excerpts from more credible news sources can leave the impression that Trump’s comments are trustworthy. Overall, these findings are consistent with Biasly’s overall Fair reliability rating.
Selection and Omission Bias
Even when the author does not directly insert their opinions in an article, their biases can contribute to omitting critical information and selectively emphasizing others as the absolute truth. An example of this is the article, “Group Of Republican Senators Seek To Block Democrat Legislation And Nominations Following Trump Verdict,” by Danielle. She included quotes from Republicans who were upset by Donald Trump’s guilty verdict in New York, such as the statement from Utah Senator Mike Lee.
“Strongly worded statements are not enough. Those who turned our judicial system into a political cudgel must be held accountable. We are no longer cooperating with any Democrat legislative priorities or nominations, and we invite all concerned Senators to join our stand,”
However, what she fails to mention is that the Biden Administration or Democratic Party was not directly involved in Donald Trump’s trial in Manhattan. Omitting this critical fact leaves the impression that the White House and judicial system colluded to imprison its political opponents. The strong emphasis of conservative viewpoints with no fact-checking on their accuracy is a serious credibility issue for the blog.
In opinion pieces, issues with factuality, sources, selection, and omission are frequently present. The articles we’ve covered so far are mostly biased and exclude adequate relevant background and information that may contradict the author’s position. As a news organization with a conservative slant, 100 Percent Fed Up has a small incentive to continue appealing to conservative viewpoints to maintain the interests of its sizable right-wing readership. But now that we’ve enumerated typical trustworthiness indications, you may stay current by keeping yourself informed on the most accurate news
So is 100 Percent Fed Up Reliable?
Finally, it can be argued that 100 Percent Fed Up is a questionable news source with an inadequate reputation for journalistic integrity, due to its tendency to promote a conservative, pro-Trump agenda and conspiracies. The more you research media reliability and accuracy, the simpler it will be for you to spot problems with sources, selection, omission, and factuality. To help with this, you can use Biasly’s News Bias Checker to uncover reliability problems and assist you in finding the most accurate and dependable news.