Is WBFF biased?
The rating organisations do not give WBFF one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans right. We have seen it on 2 published stories of ours.
The short answers
Is WBFF biased?
The rating organisations do not give WBFF one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans right. An outlet rating describes a broad pattern in its output, not every article it publishes.
Is WBFF left or right?
The rating organisations do not give WBFF one shared verdict in the records we hold. Their published ratings are Ad Fontes Media: Centre; Media Bias/Fact Check: Leans right. In the three-way grouping used on story pages, that puts it under Right.
Is WBFF reliable?
The factual-reliability assessments we hold for WBFF 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 WBFF has been covering
Our account of each story, written from every outlet that ran it, with WBFF’s own report linked underneath.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley has invited former special counsel Jack Smith to testify on 22 September 2026 about his investigation into President Donald Trump. Smith’s lawyers confirmed his appearance pending Justice Department approval, while outlets diverged on whether the hearing relates to his prosecutions or broader oversight.
WBFF reported it asJack Smith gets invite to testify before Senate next month. Here's why. (opens WBFF in a new tab)
The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to vote Tuesday on advancing acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination after Republican senators secured written assurances that a $1.8 billion fund tied to the Trump-IRS settlement would not proceed. Democrats argue the guarantees fall short of permanent protections.
WBFF reported it asRepublican senator holdouts will now vote to advance Trump's Attorney General nomination (opens WBFF 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.
Very high factuality
Who owns it
- Sinclair Broadcast GroupMedia Conglomeratedirect owner
Where it publishes from
- Publishes from
- Baltimore, Maryland, United States
- Official site
- foxbaltimore.com
- Seen publishing on
- foxbaltimore.com
- Access
- Free to read
- Wikipedia
- Entry
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
- 2
- Reports listed
- 2
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 4 August 2026
2 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 1 of those stories, outlets rated right were largely absent from the coverage and WBFF ran the story anyway.
Across the 2 stories of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of WBFF: its report arrived a median of 21 hours after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 8 August 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 8 August 2026. Ratings pulled 8 August 2026.
Other outlets rated the same way
Publishers carrying the same published leaning as WBFF, 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 WBFF 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.