Centre for Research on Globalisation

Centre for Research on Globalisation
Typewebsite
StatusGenerally unreliable Generally unreliable
Deprecatedno
Blacklistedno
Recency2019
Domain globalresearch.ca
In source code

External links in articles

Spamcheck tool


Summary

Due to persistent abuse, Global Research is on the Wikipedia spam blacklist, and links must be whitelisted before they can be used. The Centre for Research on Globalisation is the organization that operates the Global Research website (globalresearch.ca, not to be confused with GlobalSecurity.org). The CRG is considered generally unreliable due to its propagation of conspiracy theories and lack of editorial oversight. It is biased or opinionated, and its content is likely to constitute undue weight. As it often covers fringe material, parity of sources should be considered.

Excerpt

In 2001, Chossudovsky founded the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), becoming its director and the editor of its online resource, Global Research. Located in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, the CRG describes itself as an "independent research and media organization" providing "analysis on issues which are barely covered by the mainstream media".

Discussions

RSN

Recency

Stale discussions 2019

Rfcs

No Rfcs for this source.

Notes

References

    Original table row for comparison

    (remove this when this source page is ready to go live)

    Perennial sources
    Source Status
    (legend)
    Discussions Use
    List Last Summary
    Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG, Global Research, globalresearch.ca) Blacklisted Generally unreliable Spam blacklist request 2019

    2019

    Due to persistent abuse, Global Research is on the Wikipedia spam blacklist, and links must be whitelisted before they can be used. The Centre for Research on Globalisation is the organization that operates the Global Research website (globalresearch.ca, not to be confused with GlobalSecurity.org). The CRG is considered generally unreliable due to its propagation of conspiracy theories and lack of editorial oversight. It is biased or opinionated, and its content is likely to constitute undue weight. As it often covers fringe material, parity of sources should be considered. 1 Links Spamcheck
    2 Links Spamcheck
    3 Links Spamcheck