Colorado Springs Gazette
Bias and Reliability

“The upshot is a lurch to the left by the state’s dominant political party — which already had been dragging Colorado in that direction at a breakneck pace.”

The diction here is doing significant work; “lurch” and “dragging” are loaded words that frame Democratic policy change as reckless and coercive rather than as a democratic response to voter preferences. The same editorial describes the Republican candidate Barb Kirkmeyer as “a fiscal hawk, common-sense conservative and advocate for the taxpayer,” language that is straightforwardly favorable without the critical edge applied to Democratic figures throughout the piece.

Expediency bias is also visible in this editorial. The headline “Dems Move Left; GOP Regains Hope” frames the same election cycle as bad news for one party and good news for the other before the reader has read a single sentence. That framing is built into the headline itself; a reader who sees only the title comes away with a clear directional impression that the editorial board intended.

By contrast, the news article “Colorado Springs Police Report Drop in Homicides in 2025, Rise in Drone Responses,” by Brennen Kauffman, demonstrates what Colorado Springs Gazette’s straight news reporting looks like at its best. The piece draws directly on attributed statements from Mayor Yemi Mobolade and Police Chief Adrian Vasquez, cites verifiable crime statistics, and presents the information without editorializing:

“Colorado Springs is safer today than when I first took office. That is not just a statement. That is backed by real and measurable data you are about to see.”

Save Rockrimmon Library group has packed the City Council Chamber and the City Hall steps in Colorado Springs. The group is asking the council to step in and prevent library branch closure at the end of November https://t.co/3M8DHJGeXT

— Brennen Kauffman (@blkauffman7) November 12, 2024

Brennen Kauffman’s X account shows how closely he follows Colorado Springs politics. In a November 12, 2024 post, he shared a video from a City Council meeting where a “Save Rockrimmon Library” group packed the chamber and City Hall steps, asking the council to stop a library branch closure. Posting from the room shows that Kauffman covers city government closely. The post reads as straight news rather than opinion, which is consistent with the neutral tone of his crime reporting.

Another example is “Colorado Republicans praise Trump’s pick of ‘young, dynamic’ JD Vance as his running mate” by Ernest Luning. Its headline uses the phrase “young, dynamic” to describe JD Vance, which creates a positive impression of Donald Trums’s running mate. Luning’s posts on X before May 2025 mostly share breaking political news from Colorado and attribute claims to the people involved, as in this April 2024 post:

Colorado Republicans approve resolution virtually unanimously to censure and admonish Norma Anderson & other Republicans who sued to remove Donald Trump from the ballot under 14th amendment, and ask them to leave the GOP “given their betrayal to our values” #copolitics https://t.co/KGqmybHkoP

— Ernest Lee Luning (@eluning) April 6, 2024

The post reports the party’s vote and quotes its resolution without taking a side, which is consistent with the attribution-based style of his Vance article.

Overall, Colorado Springs Gazette’s coverage reflects a clear pattern in the articles reviewed: straight news reporting that is factual and restrained, and editorial content that is openly conservative. Readers who understand this distinction will be better equipped to get value from the publication’s strong local journalism while accounting for the ideological lens of its opinion pages.

Analysis of Colorado Springs Gazette Opinion Articles

Colorado Springs Gazette maintains a clearly labeled opinion section that includes both staff editorials from its editorial board and guest opinion pieces from outside contributors. Unlike outlets where opinion bias seeps into news reporting, Colorado Springs Gazette keeps these sections relatively well separated, which is worth acknowledging as a journalistic practice. That said, the volume and consistency of the editorial board’s conservative commentary make the opinion section the most clearly right-leaning part of the publication.

The opinion piece “EDITORIAL: Denver Pushes Back at Socialist Antisemitism,” published July 12, 2026, provides a clear example of the board’s rhetorical style. The piece describes Democratic congressional candidate Melat Kiros as an “outspoken Israel antagonist” with “shrill, fringe politics” who “touts the voodoo economics of socialism.”

The characterization of a major party’s primary winner as a practitioner of “voodoo economics” is dismissive rather than analytical; it’s editorial mockery dressed as political commentary.

Another opinion piece, “EDITORIAL: Politicians Pump Up Their Pay on the Public’s Tab,” published May 10, 2026, shows a different side of the board’s conservative orientation, one focused on fiscal accountability rather than partisan politics. The piece criticizes Colorado state legislators for giving themselves an automatic pay raise during a period of budget deficits, calling it “beyond out of touch.” This kind of criticism isn’t inherently partisan; it cites specific dollar figures and also praises Democratic lawmakers who opposed the raise:

“For House members, the 2.8% bump will make them $48,893 per year. For Senate members, the 4.5% increase brings them to about $49,701. All while the state stares down a $1.5 billion budget deficit forcing cuts in services affecting everyday law-abiding, taxpaying citizens.”

That’s substantive policy criticism backed by verifiable numbers, a meaningfully more reliable form of opinion writing than the ideological characterizations in the Kiros editorial.

Not all Colorado Springs Gazette opinion content originates with the editorial board. The publication also runs guest opinion pieces and regularly republishes content from the Washington Examiner, a conservative outlet owned by the same group: Clarity Media Group. The consistent republication of Washington Examiner content in Colorado Springs Gazette’s opinion pages means readers often encounter a second conservative editorial voice alongside the board’s own.

Analysis of Reliability in Colorado Springs Gazette’s Online News Articles

Colorado Springs Gazette holds a strong reputation in its straight news coverage, including its factual reporting and proper sourcing. The outlet draws primarily on staff reporters for local and regional news, supplemented by Associated Press wire content for national and international stories, a sourcing model that tends to produce factually grounded coverage even when the publication’s editorial board is openly advocating for conservative positions. Reliability can still vary between staff reports, wire stories and opinion columns, and readers can check individual articles with Biasly’s Bias Check Chrome Extension.

A strong example of solid, reliable local journalism is the article “Downtown Colorado Springs Sees Residential Momentum, Gains Visitors in 2025: Report,” by Breeanna Jent, published March 19, 2026. The piece draws on the Downtown Partnership’s 11th annual State of Downtown report, cites data from more than a dozen sources, including city departments and the Colorado Department of Local Affairs, and presents specific, verifiable figures:

“The number of residents who live downtown … surged from 2,574 residents in 2024 to 4,860 in 2025.”

This is the kind of data-driven local journalism that makes Colorado Springs Gazette a genuinely valuable resource for Colorado Springs readers, not opinion-driven framing, but primary-source reporting grounded in publicly available data.

A more complicated reliability picture emerges in the energy policy column “PERSPECTIVE: A reprieve for reliable Colorado energy?” by Sean Paige, a former Colorado Springs City Council and Utilities Board member, published April 26, 2026, which argues against Colorado’s renewable energy benchmarks. The piece accurately reports that “coal still generated 23.7% of Colorado’s in-state power” in 2025, according to EIA data, a verifiable figure.

But it then characterizes renewable energy as delivering only “a fraction” of its reported output without providing a corresponding data source for that claim, allowing an editorial conclusion to outrun its supporting evidence. This pattern, accurate figures embedded in a framing that goes beyond what the data supports, is the kind of issue Biasly’s reliability metrics look for.

Quality of Sources and Facts Used

Colorado Springs Gazette often publishes opinion pieces from a conservative perspective. However, some editorials rely heavily on one political interpretation while giving little attention to opposing viewpoints.

Consider the editorial “EDITORIAL: Dems Move Left; GOP Regains Hope.” While it is based on the results of Colorado’s 2026 primary election, the editorial consistently frames Democratic victories as evidence that the party has become too extreme. The piece offers very little explanation for why Democratic candidates were successful or why many Colorado voters continue to support them.

The editorial acknowledges that Attorney General Phil Weiser defeated Senator Michael Bennet and that Julie Gonzales received a strong share of the vote, but it never presents their reasoning or policy positions. Instead, the editorial repeatedly advances its own interpretation of the election.

• “The upshot is a lurch to the left by the state’s dominant political party.”
• “The size of the state government has mushroomed.”
• “[C]rime has soared and remains higher than in most other states…”

The article later shifts to praising Republican candidate Barb Kirkmeyer, describing her as:

“[a] fiscal hawk, common-sense conservative and advocate for the taxpayer.”

Concerning the Democratic candidates, there is little discussion of why voters supported them or any evidence defending the policies being criticized. This lack of opposing viewpoints encourages readers to accept the editorial board’s conclusions without considering alternative explanations.

The editorial contains no quotations from outside sources. Every line is written in the board’s own voice, so there are no quotes to measure for length or balance.

Because no-quote opinion pieces cannot show how Colorado Springs Gazette handles sourcing, the analysis below turns to a news article for contrast.

In contrast, “Colorado Republicans praise Trump’s pick of ‘young, dynamic’ JD Vance as his running mate” is built almost entirely on attributed reactions from named officials and candidates. It contains 27 quoted passages. The shortest is a single word (“thrilled”), the longest runs 60 words (state Rep. Gabe Evans), and the average is roughly 23 words. Of those 27 passages, 24 come from Republicans and 3 from Democrats.

The sources referenced in the article include:

• Dave Williams, Colorado GOP chairman quoted on the delegation’s reaction (Right)
• Donald Trump, Truth Social post announcing the pick (Right)
• Lauren Boebert, U.S. representative quoted from X (Right)
• Doug Lamborn, U.S. representative quoted by text message (Right)
• Greg Lopez, U.S. representative quoted from social media (Right)
• Gabe Evans, state representative and 8th District nominee (Right)
• Jeff Hurd, 3rd District Republican nominee (Right)
• Jeff Crank, 5th District Republican nominee (Right)
• Randy Corporon, Republican National Committee member (Right)
• Weston Imer, convention delegate (Right)
• Eric Grossman, Mineral County GOP chairman (Right)
• Steve Peck, Douglas County Republican Party chairman (Right)
• Paul Lundeen, state Senate minority leader (Right)
• Rose Pugliese, state House minority leader (Right)
• Patrick Neville, former state House minority leader (Right)
• Diana DeGette, U.S. representative quoted from X (Left)
• Colorado Democratic Party, statement on X (Left)
• Shad Murib, Colorado Democratic Party chair (Left)

The sourcing is lopsided by design, since the story is about Republican reactions: 15 of the 18 sources are Republican, with Democratic counterpoints placed at the end and given less space. The reporter attributes each statement directly and adds little evaluative framing, so the author reads as center in this piece, while the article’s source mix leans right.

On factual accuracy, the article’s basic facts match independent reporting: Trump announced Vance as his running mate on July 15, 2024, during the Republican National Convention, and Vance was 39 at the time. Partisan claims inside the quotes are clearly attributed to the speakers rather than stated by the reporter.

Returning to the Dems Move Left editorial, its sourcing is unbalanced because it aims to persuade rather than present competing viewpoints equally. Democratic politicians appear frequently, but mainly as examples supporting the editorial’s claim that the party has moved too far left. The board’s own conservative voice dominates the framing, and Barb Kirkmeyer receives the most favorable treatment. With almost no attributed quotations from outside sources, nearly all of the article’s voice belongs to the editorial board itself.

In how sources are used, the editorial consistently praises Republican candidates while criticizing Democratic leadership. Statements such as “The size of the state government has mushroomed” and “Crime has soared and remains higher than in most other states” are presented as conclusions without supporting statistics or discussion of alternative explanations.

Likewise, Kirkmeyer is described as “a fiscal hawk, common-sense conservative and advocate for the taxpayer,” while Democratic policies are blamed for economic and public safety problems. Because the editorial overwhelmingly favors one political perspective and provides little space for opposing arguments, the editorial board reads as right-leaning in this piece.

On factual accuracy, the editorial accurately reports the major outcomes of Colorado’s 2026 primary elections, including Phil Weiser’s gubernatorial nomination, Melat Kiros’s congressional primary victory, and Barb Kirkmeyer’s competitive Republican campaign. Other news organizations similarly reported these election results.

However, broader claims that Democratic policies have caused rising crime, reduced business investment, or pushed Colorado significantly away from the political center are political interpretations rather than objectively established facts. Those conclusions are consistent with conservative opinion writing but remain debated by other news organizations and policy analysts.

Selection and Omission Bias

Selection and omission bias at Colorado Springs Gazette shows up most clearly in its editorial board’s coverage of Colorado politics, where Democratic policy positions are often framed critically while Republican positions receive more sympathetic treatment.

The editorial article “EDITORIAL: A Unifier Takes the Helm of Colorado’s GOP,” published June 3, 2026, describes the election of a new Republican Party chairman in terms that are almost entirely favorable: “a level head,” “roundly respected,” “a unifier.” Its critical language targets the Democratic Party’s “ever more radical policies” and the GOP’s own past “infighting” and “fringe conspiracy theories,” though the GOP’s problems are presented as being solved under new leadership.

No equivalent space is given to Democratic Party officials to explain their own policy rationales or respond to the board’s characterization of their platform as radical.

This pattern, presenting Republican political developments favorably while characterizing Democratic ones critically, without giving the opposing side space to respond, is a recurring feature of Colorado Springs Gazette’s editorial coverage, and one that readers should account for when using its opinion pages to understand Colorado politics.

The redistricting editorial piece “EDITORIAL: Colorado Supreme Court Derails Gerrymandering,” published July 2, 2026, illustrates another dimension of this pattern. The piece accurately reports that the Colorado Supreme Court upheld the voter-approved redistricting system, but frames a Democratic-initiated legal challenge as “an attempt initiated by Democrats to subvert” the voter-approved system. This language presupposes bad faith on the part of Democratic operatives without exploring their legal rationale. The framing is accurate in its facts but one-sided in its characterization.

Is Colorado Springs Gazette Biased?

Based on Biasly’s evaluations, Colorado Springs Gazette is rated as Somewhat Right.

By examining content patterns and the broader context of media influence, we aim to offer a balanced perspective on Colorado Springs Gazette’s political bias—and contribute to the ongoing discussion about bias in the news.

How Does Biasly Rate News Sources?

Biasly uses proprietary algorithms and a team of analysts to provide comprehensive bias evaluations across thousands of news outlets. Over 200,000 articles from more than 3,200 sources have been analyzed to identify the most accurate and unbiased stories.

Biasly assigns each outlet three key scores:

• Reliability Score – Reflects factual accuracy
• AI Bias Score – Generated via natural language processing
• Analyst Bias Score – Assessed by human political analysts

These scores are based on seven core metrics: Tone, Tendency, Diction, Author Check, Selection/Omission, Expediency Bias, and Accuracy. These elements help analysts and algorithms evaluate the political attitude conveyed by each article.

Biasly’s Bias Meter ranges from -100% (most left) to +100% (most right), with 0% indicating neutrality. The system evaluates individual articles based on political terms, policies, figures, and sentiment to calculate precise bias ratings.

Is Colorado Springs Gazette Politically Biased?

Colorado Springs Gazette earns a Somewhat Right rating for its AI Bias Score and a Somewhat Left for its Analyst Bias Score. The Analyst Bias Score is generated by reviewers from liberal, moderate, and conservative backgrounds.

Colorado Springs Gazette’s editorial board is openly conservative, regularly endorsing Republican candidates such as Barb Kirkmeyer and advocating for lower taxes and reduced government regulation. Unlike outlets where bias shows up subtly in news framing, Colorado Springs Gazette’s conservative orientation is most visible and explicit in its editorial section, which functions as an openly partisan voice for right-leaning policy positions in Colorado Springs.

That transparency is worth acknowledging. Editor Vince Bzdek has said that at Colorado Springs Gazette and its sister publications, “fairness is our guiding light.” Whether readers find that claim convincing may depend on their own political orientation.

Colorado’s political landscape provides useful context. Statewide, Colorado has voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every election since 2008, while El Paso County, home to Colorado Springs, has continued to back Republican candidates. Colorado Springs Gazette’s core readership therefore sits in one of the state’s more conservative areas, which could explain differing perceptions of its content among readers across Colorado.

How to Evaluate Bias

Although Biasly rates Colorado Springs Gazette as Somewhat Right, it’s important to remember that bias can vary from article to article. Colorado Springs Gazette also covers a wide range of topics with objectivity on many issues. This complexity underscores the importance of examining each article individually. So, let’s learn how to evaluate media bias.

Recognizing media bias requires awareness and critical thinking. Often, readers trust news sources that affirm their existing beliefs—a psychological tendency known as confirmation bias. This makes it harder to identify slanted narratives or one-sided reporting.

To address this, it’s essential to challenge your assumptions by consulting multiple perspectives and verifying information through third-party analysis. Tools like Biasly’s media bias ratings allow readers to compare the same news story across the political spectrum.

Ultimately, bias isn’t always a matter of what is said—it’s also about what is left out, how topics are framed, and which stories are chosen for coverage. Learning to recognize these patterns can help readers make more informed decisions and develop greater media literacy.

To start comparing news outlets and gain a better understanding of bias, sign up for Biasly’s Media Bias & News Analytics Platform to see how stories vary between sources.

Biasly’s reliability scores incorporate these elements in evaluating media outlets.

So How Does Colorado Springs Gazette Fare in Its Reliability?

The political reliability index developed by Biasly assesses both accuracy and trustworthiness. Colorado Springs Gazette currently holds Good Reliability Score, which is calculated as a weighted average of:

• Fact Analysis Score – Evaluates the accuracy of claims, facts, and evidence.
• Source Analysis Score – Assesses the number, diversity, and credibility of sources and quotes used.

Colorado Springs Gazette’s Source Analysis Score is Average at 48% Reliable. This reflects how Biasly rates the trustworthiness of its sourcing practices. The score is AI-generated and considers quote length, frequency, diversity, and quality.

The Fact Analysis Score of Colorado Springs Gazette is Excellent at 93% Reliable. This further shows how well Colorado Springs Gazette supports its claims, addresses selection and omission bias, and presents verifiable evidence.

While Colorado Springs Gazette leans toward factual reporting, occasional lapses—such as unbalanced viewpoints or incomplete data—can affect its reliability rating. These nuances emphasize the importance of analyzing individual articles.

Colorado Springs Gazette’s Accuracy and Reliability

According to Biasly’s analysis, Colorado Springs Gazette maintains Good Reliability Score, but individual articles may vary significantly. Let’s dive into the details.

Two common types of bias that affect factuality include:

• Selection Bias – particularly in editorial content, where Republican policy positions often receive more sympathetic framing than Democratic ones
• Omission Bias – particularly in opinion pieces, where Democratic officials are characterized critically without being given space to respond to those characterizations

The energy column discussed earlier is a clear example of both: accurate data points embedded in a framing that omits the strongest counterarguments for renewable energy policy. The political editorials on Colorado’s primary results show similar patterns: one-directional framing that presents conservative candidates favorably while applying more critical language to Democratic figures.

On the other hand, Colorado Springs Gazette’s local news reporting on crime statistics, economic development, housing, and public safety draws on primary sources and verifiable data in the articles reviewed, and its Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative work reflects a commitment to accountability reporting.

Reliability varies considerably between its news pages and its editorial section. Readers who treat those two components of the publication separately, applying appropriate critical thinking to the editorial board’s advocacy while drawing on the news staff’s factual reporting, will get the most accurate picture of Colorado Springs from the publication.

So, is Colorado Springs Gazette Reliable?

Overall, Colorado Springs Gazette can be considered to be an outlet that is very reliable. It demonstrates a consistent goal of journalistic integrity and typically supports claims with sources and quotes. Occasional omissions and framing bias do appear, particularly on culturally sensitive or partisan issues.

As media literacy improves, readers can more easily detect issues with selection bias, omission bias, and factuality. To strengthen your ability to assess reliability across the political spectrum, use Biasly’s News Bias Checker to compare how multiple outlets report the same story.

This empowers you to consume more accurate, balanced, and dependable news.

In straight news coverage, this asymmetry is much less visible in the articles reviewed. Crime reporting, economic reporting, and local government coverage reflect the same neutral, factual standard regardless of the party affiliation of the officials involved. This reinforces the importance of distinguishing between Colorado Springs Gazette’s news staff and its editorial board when evaluating the publication’s overall orientation.

Policy and Issue Framing

On energy policy, Colorado Springs Gazette’s opinion pages have framed fossil fuel development as a practical necessity and renewable energy mandates as costly overreach. Columnist Sean Paige argues that “an overinvestment in intermittent energy sources, like wind and solar, combined with an underinvestment in dispatchable power, including reliable old coal plants, dangerously destabilize the system,” a framing that reflects the conservative position on energy policy without engaging substantively with the counterarguments made by clean energy advocates.

On fiscal policy, the editorial board advocates for lower government spending and criticizes tax increases. The legislative pay raise editorial is an example where the board’s fiscal conservatism produces pointed criticism of Democratic state legislators, and the board also praised Democratic Reps. Bob Marshall and Lorena Garcia, along with Republicans, for opposing the raise.

Coverage and Relevance

Colorado Springs Gazette’s reporting covers many of the central issues in the current conversation about media political bias, including how regional newspapers cover state elections, how editorial boards can openly advocate for a political party while maintaining credible news operations, and how ownership influences editorial direction. As the dominant daily newspaper in one of the most politically conservative major cities in Colorado, it serves as a useful case study for understanding how local media bias operates in a conservative-leaning community.

Readers who want to explore how Colorado Springs Gazette’s coverage compares to outlets with different political orientations can visit Biasly’s Media Bias Chart to see where it sits relative to other Colorado publications and regional newspapers nationally.

Clarity Media Group also owns the Washington Examiner, a conservative news outlet based in Washington, D.C., a connection that helps explain why Washington Examiner content appears regularly in Colorado Springs Gazette’s opinion pages.

Who Funds Colorado Springs Gazette?

Colorado Springs Gazette operates as a for-profit media company under Clarity Media Group and the Anschutz Corporation. Its site sells print and digital subscriptions and carries advertising; as a privately held company, its finances are not public, so the mix of revenue cannot be independently assessed. Unlike some regional outlets that have transitioned to nonprofit models, Colorado Springs Gazette remains a privately held, for-profit publication backed by one of Colorado’s wealthiest individuals.

Because the Anschutz Corporation does not publicly disclose detailed financial information about its media subsidiaries, it is difficult to assess the specific revenue breakdown or the degree to which Anschutz’s other business interests, which include significant holdings in oil and gas exploration, might intersect with the editorial board’s advocacy on energy policy.

The ownership structure produces a publication where the editorial board’s conservative orientation is well aligned with the known political and ideological values of its owner, which readers should factor into how they interpret the opinion pages.

On the news side, reporter David Philipps won Colorado Springs Gazette’s second Pulitzer Prize in 2014 for national reporting on the mistreatment of wounded combat veterans, work that demonstrates the publication’s capacity for serious investigative journalism that holds institutions accountable regardless of their political affiliation. Philipps later moved to The New York Times. Longtime columnist Linda Navarro has worked at Colorado Springs Gazette in various roles for 56 years as of 2022 and represents the publication’s deep roots in the Colorado Springs community.

The publication also regularly publishes content from Washington Examiner contributors, extending the reach of Clarity Media Group’s conservative editorial voice into Colorado Springs Gazette’s opinion pages.

Related Tools and Resource Pages

To better understand how Colorado Springs Gazette fits into the broader media landscape, we recommend exploring these helpful resources:

• Media Bias Chart: See where Colorado Springs Gazette ranks among hundreds of media outlets across the political spectrum.
• Political Bias Chart: Visualize political slants of news sources across various policy areas.
• Journalist Bias Analytics Platform: Explore how individual journalists contribute to bias within their publications.
• Politician Bias Analytics Platform: Compare how politicians are framed differently by Colorado Springs Gazette and other outlets.
• Media Literacy Education Platform: Learn how to critically assess media sources, bias techniques, and news reliability.