Is WOFL biased?
Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check place WOFL in the centre. We have seen it on 4 published stories of ours.
The short answers
Is WOFL biased?
Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check place WOFL in the centre. An outlet rating describes a broad pattern in its output, not every article it publishes.
Is WOFL left or right?
Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check place WOFL in the centre. In the three-way grouping used on story pages, that puts it under Centre.
Is WOFL reliable?
The factual-reliability assessments we hold for WOFL 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.
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
- Fox Television StationsCorporationdirect owner
- Fox CorporationMedia Conglomerateparent group
- Murdoch familyMedia Conglomerateparent group
Where it publishes from
- Publishes from
- Orlando, Orange County, Florida, United States
- Official site
- fox35orlando.com
- Seen publishing on
- fox35orlando.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
- 4
- Reports listed
- 4
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 4 August 2026
4 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. WOFL is rated centre, so there is no side for it to be counted against and we publish no figure here.
Across the 4 stories of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of WOFL: its report arrived a median of 2 days after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 7 August 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 7 August 2026. Ratings pulled 7 August 2026.
Stories we have seen it on
- WOFLCentreVery high factualityNew Mexico sues federal government for release of Epstein files (opens WOFL in a new tab)
Our report: New Mexico sues US Justice Department over blocked Epstein files at Zorro Ranch
- WOFLCentreVery high factualityRep. Chuck Edwards ends campaign after ethics committee cites inappropriate conduct (opens WOFL in a new tab)
Our report: Chuck Edwards ends re-election bid after House Ethics Committee recommends censure
- WOFLCentreVery high factualityErica Schwartz: Who is the new CDC director? (opens WOFL in a new tab)
Our report: CDC confirms first permanent director in a year with Dr. Erica Schwartz
- WOFLCentreVery high factualityTrump criticizes Jeanine Pirro over dropped Reflecting Pool charges: 'She choked' (opens WOFL in a new tab)
Our report: Trump calls US Attorney Pirro ‘folded like an umbrella’ over dropped charges
Other outlets rated the same way
Publishers carrying the same published leaning as WOFL, 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.
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.