sciencepresse.qc.ca media bias and reliability
Media Bias/Fact Check places sciencepresse.qc.ca as leaning left. We have seen it on 1 published story of ours.
The short answers
Is sciencepresse.qc.ca biased?
Media Bias/Fact Check places sciencepresse.qc.ca as leaning left. An outlet rating describes a broad pattern in its output, not every article it publishes.
Is sciencepresse.qc.ca left or right?
Media Bias/Fact Check places sciencepresse.qc.ca as leaning left. In the three-way grouping used on story pages, that puts it under Left.
Is sciencepresse.qc.ca reliable?
The factual-reliability assessments we hold for sciencepresse.qc.ca are Media Bias/Fact Check: High factuality. These are outlet-level assessments, not a guarantee that every report is correct.
What sciencepresse.qc.ca has been covering
Our account of each story, written from every outlet that ran it, with sciencepresse.qc.ca’s own report linked underneath.
Global carbon pollution from fossil fuels is projected to decrease by 0.4% in 2026, marking the third drop this century. This decline is largely linked to supply shocks from the Iran war and the growth of renewable energy, though total CO2 emissions are expected to increase.
sciencepresse.qc.ca reported it asCO2 Drop in 2026: an Effect of the Strait of Ormuz (opens sciencepresse.qc.ca in a new tab)
Who says so
One organisation has published a rating for this outlet. Where they disagree, the disagreement is the useful part and it is left standing.
- Media Bias/Fact CheckleanLeftCheck it
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
- Media Bias/Fact CheckhighCheck it
Who owns it
We hold no ownership record for sciencepresse.qc.ca.
Where it publishes from
- Publishes from
- Canada
- Official site
- sciencepresse.qc.ca
- Seen publishing on
- sciencepresse.qc.ca
- 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
- 1
- Reports listed
- 1
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 12 November 2026
1 of those reports was paywalled or blocked to us. Our reading of this outlet is built on the 0 we could open, not on everything it published.
We have not seen sciencepresse.qc.ca cover a story that outlets rated left were largely absent from.
On the one story of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of sciencepresse.qc.ca: its report arrived a median of 18 hours after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 12 November 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 12 November 2026. Ratings pulled 12 November 2026.
Other outlets rated the same way
Publishers carrying the same published leaning as sciencepresse.qc.ca, also publishing from Canada, 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 sciencepresse.qc.ca 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.