Yes, the media's Biden coverage was flawed. But its reporting on Trump was far worse | Margaret Sullivan

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

51% : " From 2015 - when Trump first declared his candidacy for president - right through the 2024 election, the press in general didn't get across the reality.
28% : "False equivalence, normalizing the abnormal, treating Trump as no real danger were the norm, not the exception.
12% : There's plenty of blame to go around for Biden's ultimate loss - and the horrors that it brought the whole world in the election of Donald Trump to a second term.
8% : When is the reckoning coming for the failures to cover Trump effectively? At what point will there be a general acknowledgment and some serious self-scrutiny about the way big media failed to adequately convey what would happen if Trump were elected again? "I have a hard time watching journalists high-five each other over books on [the White House] covering up for Biden," wrote the political scientist and scholar Norman Ornstein, one of the sanest commentators about politics in recent years.
3% : I've long believed that Times editors were so dedicated to proving that they could be tough on Candidate Clinton - convinced she would be the president and that Trump was no real threat - that they went way overboard. Was the fault for electing Trump entirely theirs or even the fault of the mainstream media in general led by them?

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.