The San Francisco Standard media bias and reliability
The rating organisations do not give The San Francisco Standard one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are AllSides: Centre; Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans left. We have seen it on 5 published stories of ours.
The short answers
Is The San Francisco Standard biased?
The rating organisations do not give The San Francisco Standard one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are AllSides: Centre; 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 The San Francisco Standard left or right?
The rating organisations do not give The San Francisco Standard one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are AllSides: Centre; Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans left. In the three-way grouping used on story pages, that puts it under Centre.
Is The San Francisco Standard reliable?
The factual-reliability assessments we hold for The San Francisco Standard are Media Bias/Fact Check: High factuality. These are outlet-level assessments, not a guarantee that every report is correct.
What The San Francisco Standard has been covering
Our account of each story, written from every outlet that ran it, with The San Francisco Standard’s own report linked underneath.
Stanford University's Residential & Dining Enterprises used AI to alter a promotional photo, replacing a Latino student with an AI-generated Black woman and digitally slimming other students. The student stated the changes made him feel 'silenced and erased'.
The San Francisco Standard reported it asStanford University replaced a Latino man with an AI-generated Black woman in a photo (opens The San Francisco Standard in a new tab)
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.
The San Francisco Standard reported it asNew techie status symbol just dropped: The iPhone Duo (opens The San Francisco Standard 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.
The San Francisco Standard reported it asNew techie status symbol just dropped: The iPhone Duo (opens The San Francisco Standard in a new tab)
An Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent left a firearm unattended in a San Francisco International Airport restroom on July 21. The gun was found by a flight attendant, leading to the closure of the stall and a police response. The agent later retrieved the weapon.
The San Francisco Standard reported it asICE agent’s gun found in SFO bathroom (opens The San Francisco Standard in a new tab)
Organisations advocating to end child marriage in the United States are targeting Republican lawmakers at state and federal levels, framing it as a nonpartisan issue affecting children. Some states are advancing laws to set the minimum marriage age at 18, while California legislators face lobbying to remove exceptions.
The San Francisco Standard reported it asChild marriage in California: Teen marriage survivor advocates for state ban (opens The San Francisco Standard in a new tab)
Who says so
3 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.
Very high factuality
- Media Bias/Fact CheckhighCheck it
Who owns it
We hold no ownership record for The San Francisco Standard.
Where it publishes from
- Publishes from
- San Francisco, San Francisco County, California, United States
- Official site
- sfstandard.com
- Seen publishing on
- sfstandard.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
- 5
- Reports listed
- 5
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 12 August 2026
5 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. The San Francisco Standard is rated centre, so there is no side for it to be counted against and we publish no figure here.
Across the 5 stories of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of The San Francisco Standard: its report arrived a median of 33 hours after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 26 September 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 26 September 2026. Ratings pulled 11 September 2026.
Other outlets rated the same way
Publishers carrying the same published leaning as The San Francisco Standard, also publishing from United States, 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 The San Francisco Standard 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.