Hong Kong Free Press media bias and reliability
The rating organisations do not give Hong Kong Free Press one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans left. We have seen it on 6 published stories of ours.
The short answers
Is Hong Kong Free Press biased?
The rating organisations do not give Hong Kong Free Press one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans left. An outlet rating describes a broad pattern in its output, not every article it publishes.
Is Hong Kong Free Press left or right?
The rating organisations do not give Hong Kong Free Press one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans left. In the three-way grouping used on story pages, that puts it under Left.
Is Hong Kong Free Press reliable?
The factual-reliability assessments we hold for Hong Kong Free Press are Ad Fontes Media: Very high factuality; Media Bias/Fact Check: High factuality. These are outlet-level assessments, not a guarantee that every report is correct.
What Hong Kong Free Press has been covering
Our account of each story, written from every outlet that ran it, with Hong Kong Free Press’s own report linked underneath.
Three Hong Kong activists who organized annual vigils commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown are set to be sentenced Friday. They face up to 10 years in prison for inciting subversion under the national security law, a case seen as a measure of freedoms in the city.
Hong Kong Free Press reported it asHong Kong Tiananmen vigil activists sentenced up to 7 years 3 months for inciting subversion (opens Hong Kong Free Press in a new tab)
Ruth Wang, a lawyer who defended members of Beijing's unregistered Zion Church, has fled to Taiwan and is seeking help with resettlement. She states Chinese authorities pressured her firm to dissolve or face closure.
Hong Kong Free Press reported it asRuth Wang, Chinese lawyer for underground church, flees to Taiwan – rights group (opens Hong Kong Free Press in a new tab)
A Hong Kong court has rejected the appeals of Cardinal Joseph Zen and four others against their convictions for failing to register the 612 Humanitarian Relief Fund. The fund supported protesters arrested during 2019 demonstrations.
Hong Kong Free Press reported it asHong Kong court upholds convictions of Cardinal Joseph Zen, trustees of 2019 protester relief fund (opens Hong Kong Free Press in a new tab)
Three former organizers of Hong Kong's annual Tiananmen Square vigils appeared in court to argue their sentences. Convicted of inciting subversion, they face up to 10 years in prison. The disbanded Hong Kong Alliance was also found guilty.
Hong Kong Free Press reported it asIn full: Tiananmen vigil activist Chow Hang-tung’s mitigation after guilty verdict in national security trial (opens Hong Kong Free Press in a new tab)
The US has designated Myanmar scholar and US citizen Min Zin as wrongfully detained by China, where he was arrested in June 2026 on espionage charges. China denies wrongful detention, while the US urges his release ahead of Xi Jinping’s visit to Washington.
Hong Kong Free Press reported it asChina denies US citizen held since June is wrongfully detained (opens Hong Kong Free Press in a new tab)
The US has imposed tariffs of up to 100% on drones and components, effective 3 September 2026, to address national security concerns and reduce dependence on Chinese imports. Drones over 25 kilograms or with thermal imaging face the highest duties, while smaller drones are subject to lower tariffs.
Hong Kong Free Press reported it asDonald Trump announces tariffs of up to 100% on imported drones (opens Hong Kong Free Press in a new tab)
Who says so
2 organisations have published a rating for this outlet, in their own words. Where they disagree, the disagreement is the useful part and it is left standing.
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.
High factuality
Who owns it
- Hong Kong Free Press LimitedIndependentdirect owner
Where it publishes from
- Publishes from
- Hong Kong, Hong Kong
- Official site
- hongkongfp.com
- Seen publishing on
- hongkongfp.com
- 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
- 6
- Reports listed
- 6
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 4 August 2026
6 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.
On 2 of those stories, outlets rated left were largely absent from the coverage and Hong Kong Free Press ran the story anyway.
Across the 6 stories of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of Hong Kong Free Press: its report arrived a median of 25 hours after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 22 September 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 16 September 2026. Ratings pulled 7 September 2026.
Other outlets rated the same way
Publishers carrying the same published leaning as Hong Kong Free Press, also publishing from Hong Kong, ordered by how often we have seen them on a story. Sharing a rating is not the same as being alike.
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 Hong Kong Free Press 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.