teknikveckan.se media bias and reliability
teknikveckan.se is held by the ratings provider we draw on, and no rater has placed it on the political spectrum. We have seen it on 3 published stories of ours.
The short answers
Is teknikveckan.se biased?
teknikveckan.se 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 teknikveckan.se left or right?
teknikveckan.se is held by the ratings provider we draw on, and no rater has placed it on the political spectrum.
Is teknikveckan.se reliable?
We do not hold a factual-reliability assessment for teknikveckan.se. A political-leaning label would not answer that question on its own, so we do not infer reliability from left, centre or right.
What teknikveckan.se has been covering
Our account of each story, written from every outlet that ran it, with teknikveckan.se’s own report linked underneath.
Apple has launched its first foldable smartphone, the iPhone Duo, at its 'Surprise and Shine' event. The company also introduced the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max. This marks the first major product launch under new CEO John Ternus.
teknikveckan.se reported it asiPhone Duo Could Become the Name of Apple's Foldable iPhone (opens teknikveckan.se in a new tab)
Apple CEO John Ternus posted a cryptic video ahead of the company's expected iPhone 18 Pro unveiling. The video appears to hint at a new variable aperture camera feature for the device, which is set to be announced alongside new Apple Watch models.
teknikveckan.se reported it asiPhone Duo Could Become the Name of Apple's Foldable iPhone (opens teknikveckan.se in a new tab)
NASA's Roman Space Telescope has successfully launched aboard a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket. The observatory is designed to study dark matter, dark energy, and exoplanets, collecting vast amounts of data to deepen our understanding of the universe.
teknikveckan.se reported it asNASA's New Super Telescope Has Left Earth (opens teknikveckan.se in a new tab)
Who says so
No rating organisation we draw on has placed teknikveckan.se. We asked on 30 August 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 teknikveckan.se.
Where it publishes from
- Official site
- teknikveckan.se
- Seen publishing on
- teknikveckan.se
- 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
- 3
- Reports listed
- 3
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 30 August 2026
3 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. teknikveckan.se has not been placed on the spectrum, so there is no side to count against and we publish no figure here.
Across the 3 stories of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of teknikveckan.se: its report arrived a median of 2 days after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 9 September 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 9 September 2026. Ratings pulled 30 August 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 teknikveckan.se 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.