Is The Washington Post Editorial Board’s Bias Center-Right or Lean Right? Panelists Decide

Sometimes, bias ratings aren’t so clearcut, especially when complex ideological nuances are at play. 

AllSides bias experts on the right, center and left deliberated the bias rating of The Washington Post Editorial Board (The Post’s View) in back-to-back Editorial Reviews in July and August. Both of those reviews returned an average rating of Lean Right (1.0), landing the rating right at the border between the categories Center and Lean Right. 

A majority of the panelists – 4 out of 6 – rated the outlet right of Center, while two panelists rated it Lean Right. 

Reviewers agreed on the Editorial Board’s stances: pro-free market capitalism, anti-Democratic Socialism, anti-government waste, anti-tax hikes and tariffs, pro-free speech, pro-vaccine and anti-Trump (but not necessarily anti-Republican). Panelists discussed at length where these positions landed its bias – Center or Lean Right?

Panelists agreed the Board’s criticism of President Trump came from a Lean Right perspective — including a free market, globalist conservative angle. For example, “Solar power is about to get more expensive. Thank Trump.” objects to Trump’s tariffs on Chinese products used to make solar panels from an economic perspective, arguing ending reliance on foreign manufacturing will only drive up prices at home and harm Americans.

“[The Board] also often took the side of other Republicans who were going against Trump – like Markwayne Mullin and Todd Blanche,” one Lean Left panelist said. 

A Center panelist agreed, adding, “When they criticize Trump, it often comes from a more moderate conservative or neoconservative stance.”

In “Telling the truth doesn’t win Markwayne Mullin MAGA brownie points,” the Board criticizes MAGA from within its own paradigm, showcasing how DHS secretary Mullin could be perceived as breaking with Trump: “The DHS secretary caught flak last week from MAGA’s nativist commentariat after an appearance at the National Governors Association summer meeting. Mullin was blasted for supporting immigration reform and correctly pointing out that some migrants can apply for permanent residence.” 

Further down in the article, the Board argues, “Opening up more work visas to understaffed areas and industries would help American employers staff up without feeling compelled to hire illegal labor,” which frames legal immigration as benefiting the economy – a neoconservative/libertarian/free market bias rather than a protectionist, populist right-wing bias, which may be more critical of increased immigration — even legal immigration — overall. 

The Board also defended upper-class taxpayers and published stories critical of Democratic Socialist policies that sought to tax the rich: “Mamdani’s own supporters caught up in his vilification of the rich,” and “Mark Cuban bests Ro Khanna on wealth taxes.” The Board framed efforts to tax the rich as government overreach and punishment for fiscal success, which panelists agreed is a conservative perspective.

“Overall, their articles often came out very in favor of wealthy people and against any politician attempting to tax or curtail wealth,” one Lean Left panelist said. 

AllSides rates The Washington Post's news coverage Lean Left, a separate rating from the Editorial Board reviewed here. The newsroom and Editorial Board operate as distinct entities, with different editors, staffs and purposes. 

You can sign up to participate in our media bias blind research surveys here.