Previous Troubling Reports

While nothing is inherently incorrect in this article, it puts an extreme emphasis on the national impacts of the election. While there are some theories that this will send waves ... While nothing is inherently incorrect in this article, it puts an extreme emphasis on the national impacts of the election. While there are some theories that this will send waves throughout the DNC, saying it definitely will may be an overstatement that, so far, has not had enough time to indicate what will happen. More

While nothing is inherently incorrect in this article, it puts an extreme emphasis on the national impacts of the election. While there are some theories that this will send waves ... While nothing is inherently incorrect in this article, it puts an extreme emphasis on the national impacts of the election. While there are some theories that this will send waves throughout the DNC, saying it definitely will may be an overstatement that, so far, has not had enough time to indicate what will happen. More

While nothing is inherently incorrect in this article, it puts an extreme emphasis on the national impacts of the election. While there are some theories that this will send waves ... While nothing is inherently incorrect in this article, it puts an extreme emphasis on the national impacts of the election. While there are some theories that this will send waves throughout the DNC, saying it definitely will may be an overstatement that, so far, has not had enough time to indicate what will happen. More

This article described the Trump administration’s recent decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites during ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel. While the author gave lots of de... This article described the Trump administration’s recent decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites during ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel. While the author gave lots of details on the B-2 bunker-buster bombs and the newly announced ceasefire, there were a very large number of opinion statements presented as fact. The author made it clear that he did not agree with Trump’s decision to bomb Iran. He strongly backed Barack Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Iran nuclear deal that Donald Trump withdrew from in 2018. The author stated, “That outcome [the JCPOA] should be the preferred objective of U.S. policy.” A lot of loaded language/rhetoric was used to criticize Trump and those who supported his decision. The author claimed that anyone who feels relief after this bombing should be cautious, claiming that the “euphoria will soon wear off.” In addition, the article seems to be one-sided, presenting only the author’s side of the issue without including any counter arguments. This is why I think this news article is troubling and contributing to misinformation. More

This article used very biased language to talk about the recent event of Trump launching bombs at Iran. This could be misinformation because instead of talk about the problem at ha... This article used very biased language to talk about the recent event of Trump launching bombs at Iran. This could be misinformation because instead of talk about the problem at hand, the article just bashes Trumps character. More

First, the article does not define what ICE's "job" even is. The article does not mention the survey size is 1,512 people until after its most inflammatory extrapolations, and it i... First, the article does not define what ICE's "job" even is. The article does not mention the survey size is 1,512 people until after its most inflammatory extrapolations, and it is buried between hyperlinked ads. The article is written in a way that attempts to extrapolate the views of 700-900 people onto the nation, as it rarely says anything such as "a majority of respondents" rather just "a majority". More

First, the article does not define what ICE's "job" even is. The article does not mention the survey size is 1,512 people until after its most inflammatory extrapolations, and it i... First, the article does not define what ICE's "job" even is. The article does not mention the survey size is 1,512 people until after its most inflammatory extrapolations, and it is buried between hyperlinked ads. The article is written in a way that attempts to extrapolate the views of 700-900 people onto the nation, as it rarely says anything such as "a majority of respondents" rather just "a majority". More

This article doesn't explain any of the methods that were used to conduct this poll. It doesn't mention how many people were polled or anything about them. It just showcases this o... This article doesn't explain any of the methods that were used to conduct this poll. It doesn't mention how many people were polled or anything about them. It just showcases this one polls that shows Trump in a positive light, while there are numerous other polls that have different results. More

The article claims that the U.S. bombing Iran was due to his "Khazarian handlers." There is no evidence that indicates this is the case, but the article uses a lot of highly pointe... The article claims that the U.S. bombing Iran was due to his "Khazarian handlers." There is no evidence that indicates this is the case, but the article uses a lot of highly pointed and inflammatory claims, including "that whole carefully cultivated image of [Trump] being a political ‘dove’ was fastidiously created by his ever-manipulative Khazarian handlers over decades" and "Khazarian handlers mentored and mind-controlled, trained and socially engineered [Trump]...for his second [civilization-destroying] term." All of it is speculative, without proof or evidence, and clearly very politicized. More

Within this article there are many loaded bias phrases by the author. Term such as "obliterated", "must destroy", or "completely and totally obliterated" demonstrate powerful image... Within this article there are many loaded bias phrases by the author. Term such as "obliterated", "must destroy", or "completely and totally obliterated" demonstrate powerful imagery which amplifies a dramatic effect pushing for a militaristic narrative. I would also say that this article relies heavily on statements from President Trump, the Pentagon, and Israeli elites and does not include information from Iran officials or regional experts making the narrative kind of one sided. In addition, the article provides insufficient detail on alternatives, civilian impact, or the long-term consequences at hand. More

This article is slightly misleading as it does not have any proper sources/citations linked within the article to prove some of the claims made within it regarding Trump's decision... This article is slightly misleading as it does not have any proper sources/citations linked within the article to prove some of the claims made within it regarding Trump's decisions surrounding Iran. More

The title of this article is somewhat biased, though not as much as the article itself. The author, Joe Sommerlad, uses facts in an attempt to convince readers that his opinions ar... The title of this article is somewhat biased, though not as much as the article itself. The author, Joe Sommerlad, uses facts in an attempt to convince readers that his opinions are also factual. Instead of simply presenting factual information and quotes, he inserts his opinions throughout the piece. More