Previous Troubling Reports

This is troubling to me from numerous standpoints - the first of which being that it's not entirely untrue. Donald Trump has had an odd track record of just sort of saying things, ... This is troubling to me from numerous standpoints - the first of which being that it's not entirely untrue. Donald Trump has had an odd track record of just sort of saying things, even when he probably shouldn't be saying them. However, the author of this article is clearly biased against Trump, even going as far as to claim that his own party is worried and distrusts him in the title. I don't think Trump is really helping his own case, but an article like this doesn't make it any better, either. The entirety of the article is written on Trump and his tendency to spread misinformation, which is just fine since he does tend to do that. But it's the specific mention of Republicans also being worried that makes it seem like there's an underlying goal here. More

This article is a little more truthful than many articles covering this issue, but it still creates a problematic rhetoric. The article frames Thurman's death as a result of aborti... This article is a little more truthful than many articles covering this issue, but it still creates a problematic rhetoric. The article frames Thurman's death as a result of abortion laws when that is certainly not the case. Thuman's death was a result of complications following the abortion pill, along with medical malpractice from medical professionals. It is very true that the doctors attending to Thurman made many mistakes and did not handle her situation correctly. However, Thurman's death could have been prevented if she simply chose not to get an abortion. The framing of this article contributes to many misconceptions about abortion laws and methods. It would be much more transparent if the article instead focused on the dangers of the abortion pill and how it could be fatal if used incorrectly. More

This article shows clear bias by presenting only Maye Musk's critical views on Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party without offering any counterpoints. The selective quotes and l... This article shows clear bias by presenting only Maye Musk's critical views on Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party without offering any counterpoints. The selective quotes and loaded language paint Harris and Democrats negatively, implying that Democrats are trying to stifle Elon Musk's innovation without evidence or alternative perspectives. For balanced reporting, it would have been helpful to include voices from both sides or provide context on Harris’s policies and achievements. This one-sided approach can mislead readers and reinforce existing biases rather than provide an objective view. More

This article tries to cast doubt on the election process of Fulton County, calling the practice in question "shady," without offering an explanation of why this county might have t... This article tries to cast doubt on the election process of Fulton County, calling the practice in question "shady," without offering an explanation of why this county might have this drop-off system in place. It also exclusively includes right-wing sources and quotes, with no liberal viewpoints to be found. In the 2024 presidential election, sensational headlines such as this one can end up casting unfounded suspicion on legitimate processes if not handled with care. Due to the lack of balanced sourcing and opposite viewpoints, I do not think this article has handled this with care. More

I find this article troubling because the headline highlights Trump and MAGA activists potentially planning to disrupt the Presidential inauguration in the event of Kamala Harris p... I find this article troubling because the headline highlights Trump and MAGA activists potentially planning to disrupt the Presidential inauguration in the event of Kamala Harris possibly winning the election. Such actions could lead to widespread unrest and undermine public trust in the electoral system. It raises concerns about the potential chaos and instability on Jan. 6 if efforts are pursued to overturn the election results. Within the article, many Trump supporters, including some representatives like Majorie Taylor Green, promote ridiculous rhetoric of the notion of the election being stolen and the election process being broken. The spread of such rhetoric and planned disruption could incite violence and lead to another potentially dangerous clash. In hindsight, the article does not contain misinformation. However, CNN's choice of publicizing to amplify this particular voice can heighten fears and tensions, potentially escalating conflicts and deepening divisions. More

The headline already says it all, calling the New York Times newspaper fascist when that simply isn't true by any definition of the word. It goes on to describe the events in quest... The headline already says it all, calling the New York Times newspaper fascist when that simply isn't true by any definition of the word. It goes on to describe the events in question is a manner that is heavily biased towards the conservative viewpoint, while assuming what the newspaper's motives are with insufficient evidence. The constant references to the center-left paper or its readership as "far-left" does not help this article's validity. It adheres to the erroneous idea that the 2020 election was fraudulent, and discards the notion that perhaps those conservative commentators did post videos that contained election misinformation, whether unintentional or intentional, in favor of aforementioned sensational speculating. This article isn't meant to inform, it's meant to push a biased viewpoint. More

Since Halloween was yesterday, here's something sort of funny and not election related for once - misinformation was spread on a website called myspirithalloween.com, which claimed... Since Halloween was yesterday, here's something sort of funny and not election related for once - misinformation was spread on a website called myspirithalloween.com, which claimed that there was a Halloween Parade taking place in Dublin, Ireland. This was in fact false, but the claim managed to dupe thousands of people into packing the streets, expecting a celebration that was not going to happen. The site claims to be based in Illinois, but all evidence collected point to the people or person behind it being based in Pakistan. This is worrying just because it's a site created to generate advertising revenue and create fake social media posts, AI-generated text, etc. Kind of insane how well these things can work sometimes. More

The article starts off quickly with being troubling in the title as it likens Harris to a toddler. Also, that what Vance says about it was brilliant. This shows the article's bias ... The article starts off quickly with being troubling in the title as it likens Harris to a toddler. Also, that what Vance says about it was brilliant. This shows the article's bias from the get go as right-leaning. The article's first opening lines do the same of showing bias with saying Harris lies a lot which makes it hard to understand her policies. The article talks multiple times about her apparent lying and tries to make cases for it as well. This article does not even try to hide it's bias which is why it is troubling news. More

The article appears to show bias against Trump, emphasizing the negative aspects of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally. It describes the event as "violent and vulgar," with "div... The article appears to show bias against Trump, emphasizing the negative aspects of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally. It describes the event as "violent and vulgar," with "divisive remarks," and highlights off-color jokes and racist statements made by speakers, implying a chaotic lack of message control. The article underscores the disapproval from Trump’s allies, referencing them as "deeply concerned" and includes quotes criticizing the offensive content. While it notes Trump’s distancing from some remarks, it does not balance this with details on any positive responses from attendees. Additionally, the piece gives weight to Democratic reactions, such as Bad Bunny’s support for Harris, suggesting an imbalance in perspective. More

This article is drenched in right-wing conspiracy thinking, phrases like "Kamala Harris and her New World Order handlers" speaking for themselves. Needless to say, opposing perspec... This article is drenched in right-wing conspiracy thinking, phrases like "Kamala Harris and her New World Order handlers" speaking for themselves. Needless to say, opposing perspectives are not shown at all, and these assertions are made with no supporting evidence in the article. It's to be expected, since this article is not trying to hide its bias in the slightest, and does not attempt to provide a balanced view. It 100% backs partisan, very conservative ads, and calls them truths without evidence. It's misinformation, short and simple. More

This article is very biased, and only shows a single perspective, with an extreme anti-immigration position. The article takes the opinion of one political strategist, that pro-imm... This article is very biased, and only shows a single perspective, with an extreme anti-immigration position. The article takes the opinion of one political strategist, that pro-immigration policies have negatively impacted Democrats as complete fact, does a lot of editorializing around it assuming that it is completely true, and then uses it as a segway into criticizing Harris. That the author phrases like "woke agenda" is proof of right-wing bias. The article also fails to offer opposing perspectives in good-faith, or examine those arguments for any merit. It's a one-sided article that tries to portray an opinion as a fact, couched in strong anti-immigrant sentiment. More

The article’s tone shows potential bias, especially in its portrayal of Trump. Phrases like "double down on his demeaning outlook" and "ripping on the U.S. city" imply a negative... The article’s tone shows potential bias, especially in its portrayal of Trump. Phrases like "double down on his demeaning outlook" and "ripping on the U.S. city" imply a negative view of Trump’s remarks on Detroit, shaping readers’ perceptions. While it covers Trump’s rally and critical comments in detail, it provides minimal information on Kamala Harris and Michelle Obama’s rally, which creates an imbalanced focus. Additionally, statements like "which is simply untrue" regarding Trump’s comparison of Detroit to Chinese cities could seem opinionated without supporting context, further contributing to a slant against him. More