CHECK-IN.dk media bias and reliability
CHECK-IN.dk is held by the ratings provider we draw on, and no rater has placed it on the political spectrum. We have seen it on 9 published stories of ours.
The short answers
Is CHECK-IN.dk biased?
CHECK-IN.dk is held by the ratings provider we draw on, and no rater has placed it on the political spectrum. An outlet rating describes a broad pattern in its output, not every article it publishes.
Is CHECK-IN.dk left or right?
CHECK-IN.dk is held by the ratings provider we draw on, and no rater has placed it on the political spectrum.
Is CHECK-IN.dk reliable?
We do not hold a factual-reliability assessment for CHECK-IN.dk. A political-leaning label would not answer that question on its own, so we do not infer reliability from left, centre or right.
What CHECK-IN.dk has been covering
Our account of each story, written from every outlet that ran it, with CHECK-IN.dk’s own report linked underneath.
The Saudi-led coalition asked civilians to evacuate the area around the Yemen Petroleum Company in Sanaa ahead of planned operations. Houthi rebels stated a harsh response would follow.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asForced Temporary Closure of Riyadh Airport (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
Yemen's Houthi rebels have warned civilians and employees to evacuate Saudi Aramco oil facilities, declaring them legitimate targets. This follows an evacuation warning issued by the Saudi-led coalition for a facility in Sanaa.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asForced Temporary Closure of Riyadh Airport (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
Houthi-run Al Masirah TV reported that Saudi Arabia struck Sanaa International Airport. This comes amid escalating clashes, with the Saudi-led coalition previously accusing Houthis of an attack on Riyadh's airport that caused civilian casualties.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asForced Temporary Closure of Riyadh Airport (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
The Saudi-led coalition conducted airstrikes on oil facilities west of Sanaa, Yemen. This action follows a coalition warning for residents to evacuate the area and Houthi threats of a severe response.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asForced Temporary Closure of Riyadh Airport (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
Flydubai flight FZ1073 experienced a severe mid-air incident on September 30, 2026, when the co-pilot allegedly stabbed Captain Smit Machchhar. The aircraft plummeted thousands of feet before passengers and crew disarmed the co-pilot, allowing a safe emergency landing.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asFlydubai Incident Being Investigated as Terrorism (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
Turkish Airlines has finalized a major order for up to 150 Boeing 737 MAX aircraft. The agreement, signed in New York with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in attendance, comprises 100 firm orders for the 737-8 model and an option for 50 more.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asNew Boeing Orders From Turkish Airlines and Biman (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
The Smithsonian's National Museum of American History is commemorating the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks with an exhibit of artifacts. The display includes personal items from the day, presented openly due to fragility, as museum leadership navigates political criticism.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it as25 Years After 9/11: The Day that Changed Aviation (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
Eight Indonesian airports, including Jakarta's Soekarno-Hatta and Halim Perdanakusuma, were closed on 7 September due to ash from the Mount Anak Krakatau eruption. The transport ministry reported 170,000 people were affected by flight cancellations.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asVolcanic Eruption: Major Consequences for Air Traffic (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
The Anak Krakatau volcano erupted on September 4-5, 2026, with an ash column observed by satellite. Loud booms were heard up to 150km away, and Indonesian authorities placed the volcano under Alert Level III, prohibiting access within a 3km radius.
CHECK-IN.dk reported it asVolcanic Eruption: Major Consequences for Air Traffic (opens CHECK-IN.dk in a new tab)
Who says so
No rating organisation we draw on has placed CHECK-IN.dk. We asked on 3 October 2026.
How reliably it reports fact
A rating of the newsroom in general, by others, and a different thing from the Trust score we publish on each story, which judges one piece of reporting.
We hold no factual-reliability rating for this outlet.
Who owns it
We hold no ownership record for CHECK-IN.dk.
Where it publishes from
- Publishes from
- Denmark
- Official site
- check-in.dk
- Seen publishing on
- check-in.dk
- Access
- Free to read
What we have seen ourselves
Counted across the stories this site has published, which is the only denominator a reader can check: every one of them has a page, and every page lists the reports it was written from.
- Stories
- 9
- Reports listed
- 9
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 3 September 2026
9 of those reports were paywalled or blocked to us. Our reading of this outlet is built on the 0 we could open, not on everything it published.
A blindspot is measured against one side of the spectrum. CHECK-IN.dk has not been placed on the spectrum, so there is no side to count against and we publish no figure here.
Across the 9 stories of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of CHECK-IN.dk: its report arrived a median of 4 days after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 18 October 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 18 October 2026. Ratings pulled 3 October 2026.
Think this page is wrong?
The leanings above are published by AllSides, Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check, and we republish them rather than make them. If you think one is misapplied, the strongest place to say so is with the organisation that made it, and every verdict here links to their page.
What we are responsible for is everything else: the ownership chain, where CHECK-IN.dk publishes from, which of our stories we have listed it on, and whether we have the right publisher at all. Tell us what is wrong and an editor reads it.
Report something wrong on this page
Anything we correct is written up in the public corrections log. We do not publish reader votes as a rating, because an unattributed rating is the thing this site exists to argue against.
Every rating on this page is a named third party’s published work, republished with its author and, where one exists, a link to it. Our own coverage record is the section we measure ourselves. Neither is a judgement of any individual report: those are scored story by story, and the reasoning is on our methodology page.