TF
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Cgtn is right about radio free Asia

Fact Check: Cgtn is right about radio free Asia

Published August 6, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact-Check Article: "Cgtn is right about Radio Free Asia" ## What We Know The claim that "CGTN is right about Radio Free Asia" requires a nuanced ...

Fact-Check Article: "Cgtn is right about Radio Free Asia"

What We Know

The claim that "CGTN is right about Radio Free Asia" requires a nuanced examination of both entities. Radio Free Asia (RFA) operates a fact-checking initiative known as the Asia Fact Check Lab (AFCL), which has been recognized for its efforts in combating misinformation, particularly from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) during Taiwan's 2024 presidential elections (Asia Fact Check Lab). The lab has produced nearly 200 reports in 2023, focusing on disinformation tactics used by the CCP to influence public opinion in Taiwan and beyond (Asia Fact Check Lab).

In contrast, CGTN, which is the international arm of state-run China Central Television, has been criticized for its potential bias and lack of credibility. Media Bias Fact Check describes CGTN as having a significant pro-China bias, often promoting narratives that align with the Chinese government's interests (CGTN Bias and Credibility). This raises questions about the reliability of any claims made by CGTN regarding RFA.

Analysis

The effectiveness of RFA's Asia Fact Check Lab in countering misinformation is well-documented. For instance, Taiwan's Foreign Minister Joseph Wu highlighted the lab's role in exposing fake polling data from pro-China media (Asia Fact Check Lab). The lab's work has been recognized at high levels of Taiwanese politics, indicating a strong reputation for accuracy and reliability in its reporting.

On the other hand, CGTN's credibility is more contentious. While it does produce content aimed at fact-checking, such as its "Facts Tell" series, the overarching narrative it promotes is often aligned with the Chinese government's perspective (Facts Tell - CGTN). This alignment raises concerns about the objectivity of its claims regarding RFA. Furthermore, CGTN's coverage has been described as lacking in transparency and accountability, which diminishes its reliability as a source of information (CGTN Bias and Credibility).

In summary, while RFA's Asia Fact Check Lab has demonstrated a commitment to factual reporting and has been recognized for its efforts against disinformation, CGTN's claims about RFA should be approached with skepticism due to its established bias and the nature of its operations.

Conclusion

The verdict on the claim "CGTN is right about Radio Free Asia" is Partially True. While CGTN may present some accurate information regarding RFA, its overall credibility is undermined by its pro-China bias and the lack of independent verification of its claims. Therefore, any assertions made by CGTN about RFA should be critically evaluated in the context of its known biases and the contrasting reputation of RFA's fact-checking initiatives.

Sources

  1. Asia Fact Check Lab
  2. Statement of Amanda Bennett
  3. Did a Chinese documentary prove China's sovereignty ...
  4. Asia Fact Check Lab
  5. China Global Television Network (CGTN) – Bias and Credibility
  6. Radio Free Asia taken off air: millions of people deprived ...
  7. Facts Tell - CGTN
  8. Who lost (the information war with) China? - Yahoo

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Cgtn is biased
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Cgtn is biased

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Cgtn is biased

Aug 6, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Islam is right about Judaism
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Islam is right about Judaism

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Islam is right about Judaism

Aug 6, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The Grayzone is right about the Uyghur genocide
Partially True

Fact Check: The Grayzone is right about the Uyghur genocide

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The Grayzone is right about the Uyghur genocide

Aug 6, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The Grayzone is right about Adrian Zenz
Partially True

Fact Check: The Grayzone is right about Adrian Zenz

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The Grayzone is right about Adrian Zenz

Aug 6, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Is Sita ram goel right about Islam ?
Partially True

Fact Check: Is Sita ram goel right about Islam ?

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Is Sita ram goel right about Islam ?

Aug 6, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks
Fact Check: Cgtn is right about radio free Asia | TruthOrFake Blog