Previous Troubling Reports

This article was not informative but rather persuasive. It read more like a blog than a news source. It did not include any opposing information and demanded action of readers. They claimed that Senate Republicans had no interest in choosing the nominees and were being "lazy" and the headline even talks of what is "deserved." This is purely subjective and should not be taken seriously.

This article was not informative but rather persuasive. It read more like a blog than a news source. It did not include any opposing information and demanded action of readers. They claimed that Senate Republicans had no interest in choosing the nominees and were being "lazy" and the headline even talks of what is "deserved." This is purely subjective and should not be taken seriously.

This article fails to mention the University failed safety requirements. Instead they paint the narrative that the wind turbine alone caused the bald eagles death.

This article is fine factually, but leaving out that a division of ICE was apart of the 2024 olympics in Paris makes the article feel like it's pushing a narrative. I would recommend less bias sources on this subject matter.

This article is fine factually, but leaving out that a division of ICE was apart of the 2024 olympics in Paris makes the article feel like it's pushing a narrative. I would recommend less bias sources on this subject matter.

The article relies on the current disputed claims made by the DHS. One thing they left out was that the child met up with his father in Texas. Leaving this information out makes it seem like ICE didn't do anything but reunite the kid with his father.

This article is troubling news because it presents a politically charged narrative that shifts the blame for the struggles of rural healthcare onto Democrats without fully contextualizing the real, complex causes. Basically, through highlighting Trump's accuasations and grievances, the article has framed health care as a political weapon instead of a public issue. This type of coverage (also evident in the title) can and will mislead readers and contribute to increased political polarization.

This article misrepresents the feud between President Trump and Chairman of the Federal Reserve Jerome Powell. It paints Powell as the agressor when in reality Trump has been the one mainly attacking Powell.

This article is troubling news because of the highly charged and emotionally loaded language used throughout, which strongly shapes the reader's perception of Trump's actions and intentions. Words like "brute force", "retribution", "ravenous bids", "the agitator", and "global domination" suggest authoritarian behavior and expanionist ambitions, setting a dramatic and ominous tone for the article. The headline also frames Trump's presidency as aggressive and dangerous before the reader even engages with the content. All in all, the article demonstrates clear bias through its repeated use of emotionally charged language that frames Trump's actions in a consistantly negative and alarming way.

This article is troubling news because of two reasons. First, the article's sensationalized, clickbait headline frames the situation dramatically before readers even engage with the details--which can potentially influence readers' perception. Second, the emotionally charged language used within the article to report on what is happening in Minnesota create a sense of urgency and conflict rather than presenting the investigation in a netural, factual way. Some examples of these phrases include "confusion and chaos", "surge of federal agents", and "political vendetta". Overall, the language used emphasizes tension and controversy instead of focusing on straightforward reporting of the events in Minnesota.

The article tries to imply Trump floated the idea of capturing Putin, when the video provided shows Trump said he didn't think that would ever be necessary. That may not be an explicit, clear-as-day "no I would never do that," but it's enough where we shouldn't be publishing articles implying he would ever actually do that.

This article cheerleads the current state of the US economy. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate has risen, 2025 was the slowest non-recession year for job growth since the early 2000s, and a significant majority of Americans feel that the economy is in poor shape.