Summations Only

Right Bias
These media sources are highly biased toward conservative causes. They utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Sources in this category may be untrustworthy.

The content ranges from extreme right wing bias to conspiracy to racism (Then you see President Barack Hussein Obama waving the line-cutters forward. He’s on their side. In fact, isn’t he a line-cutter too? How did this fatherless black guy pay for Harvard?). Breitbart has been accused of publishing fake news for the purpose of a political agenda.

Factual Reporting: MIXEDNotes: WND is an online news source that has a far right bias and dabbles in right wing conspiracies. Has mixed track record with fact checkers: here and here.

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCEThese sources publish false information that cannot be validated or are related to pseudoscience. The information on these sites is speculation that is not supported by evidence. These are the most untrustworthy sources in media. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.Factual Reporting: LOWNotes: A radio program and website run by the legendary conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. Non-stop over the top conspiracies. This is the gold standard for Tin-Foil Hat conspiracies.

Factual Reporting: MIXEDNotes: FrontPage Magazine is an online conservative political website, edited by David Horowitz and published by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a non-profit organization in Los Angeles, California (Wikipedia). This source has a pretty strong right wing bias in reporting that often is negative toward minorities and Islam.

Ha ha ha, you'll accept a list of opinions by some self-appointed website? Why?
There are very benign objective-sounding websites out there that are put up by propaganda sources.

Don't be an fucking idiot.

This paper tests a meaning-making model of conspiratorial thinking by considering how one's search for mean-ing mediates between social exclusion and the endorsement of conspiratorial (Study 1) and superstitious (Study2) beliefs. In Study 1, participants first wrote about a self-selected personal event that involved a social interac-tion, they then indicated how socially excluded they felt after the event, and, finally, they rated their endorse-ment of three well-known conspiracy theories. In Study 2, participants were randomly assigned to a Social Inclusion,a Social Exclusion, or a Control condition, after which they indicated the association between improb-able events in three scenarios. In addition, both studies mechanistically tested the relation between social exclu-sion and conspiratorial/superstitious thinking by measuring the participants' tendency to search for meaning.Both Study 1 (correlational) and Study 2 (experimental) offer support for the hypothesis that social exclusion is associated with superstitious/conspiratorial beliefs. One's search for meaning, correlational analyses revealed,mediated this relation. We discuss the implication of the findings for community-wide belief dynamics and we propose that social inclusion could be used to diminish the dissemination of superstitious beliefs and conspiracy theories

also known as blame shifting, is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unpleasant impulses by denying their existence while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.