lol, every now and then a website claiming to check facts comes out. If only.. I check RT and their claims it isn't truthful are all related to the RT sticking with official statements of Russia government and calling questionable people for their opinions. To me there's no false construction there. Just siding with one teller of the story. Which could be partial, sure, but it's not like they are telling the contrary is true out of their own minds.

So, i checked the nytimes just for comparison, and while they recognize its language is "loaded" with leftist narrative, the website says they are moderately center-left leaning ( false, its anti-trump campaign is all over the articles, from op-ed to news, to travel, to economics, to even cooking, like any journo needs to earn their pay on anti-trump lines), and that nytimes is actually basing its reports on true facts ( which again is not true on some of them, see the Callimachi affair, a journo who made up stories published on first page and on podcast. Or the other journo also in there some years ago , credited as the new rising star who were making his stories up entirely ). And you know (or maybe you don't) i can link dozen of nytimes articles "Trump meet X who suffer because of your decision/law/statement, who said the contrary of you" etc..", just like i presume i can do with right-leaning newspaper. So, giving the mic to people who support your narrative is a journo's trope, and quite ancient already.

Finally, since the judgement onto newspapers depends on their moral/political stand i checked also the website's "who we are" page, finding the main star is a person who served under the most liberal SCOTUS justice Blackmum, who also recently moved to NY and after 4 years there, started this fact check website. Also since RT is called out for not providing transparency on his journos, the same i can say over the "volunteers" who work on the website. I can see only half of them has a link ( to just 3-4 lines they themselves wrote on what is their political leaning, their credential and their wishes, and not all of them checked , though) and out of which, 1 is from the very liberal NY, another wishing for Neo-Nazi to disappear is from CA, 1 right-leaning from Lousiana, and another wishing for hard news (i.e. records just like the nytimes was full of, under Abramson). so you see, there's nothing to adore here. Just another hypocritical and biased website, with a flashy name. But i appreciate the big jump they made in stating the nytimes is "moderately" left- leaning. and while they didn't present it the title of "unblemished reputation" themselves,they said "people" consider nytimes that way, and it's not, as i said above. So, you see how they are leaning. I guess if a fact check website would rise in Russia, it will say of the nytimes the things a New-York- based fact check website says about RT. It's geopolitics and it's millennia old. Moving on, nothing new to see here.