Previous Troubling Reports

This article is very close to being informative, but the amount of loaded language makes it unreliable. Even from the first sentence "Los Angeles rioters, who are ravaging the streets in protest of deporting illegal migrants, forced three Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) facilities in the LA area to shut down due to safety concerns, delaying nearly 300 legal migrants from receiving their hard-fought American citizenship" the biases are clear. While there are some rioters in LA, there are also peaceful protesters. Labeling them all the same only serves to villainize the entire group. Saying they are "ravaging the streets" is unnecessary and contributes to the negative image the author is trying to push.

This article is slightly troublesome as it seems to vaguely support a journalist's claim the protests are being "mischaracterized" without much substance or examples of mischaracterization. It just has one sentence where it vaguely mentions stuff like old posts and AI, which may be true, but the whole article comes off as downplaying the protests.

The title is misleading. Around 90% of the article isn’t about the riots in L.A. or the deployment of the National Guard there. Instead, it primarily focuses on Trump’s military parade and how it may be perceived globally. While it’s fair to note that such parades are often associated with dictatorships and are undeniably expensive, the headline suggests that Trump is exercising unchecked power in response to the L.A. riots—which isn’t accurate. In reality, he has observed the situation while California and Los Angeles County continue to struggle with separating peaceful protesters from looters and agitators. We only need to recall how the Black Lives Matter protests escalated like wildfire...something California’s leadership failed to contain. In conclusion, Trump is not using unrestrained power in this context, and the article’s main focus is on the optics of a military parade, not the unrest in L.A. The title is misleading.

This article uses biased language to describe many other news sources, like CNN and BBC, and only captures the pro-Israel view. It also falsely posits that there is no aid distribution problem in Gaza, which we know there is.

This article only provides comments made about a California Democratic lawmaker, citing influencers on social media. It does not go further into the story to really address the actions that led to her make these comments, and only pushes one side of the story, which is harmful and polarizing.

This article includes multiple ad hominem attacks against Norma Torres from unverified sources, questioning her sanity and political affiliation while also promoting calls for removing her from office and arresting her. This sort of extrapolation from a single tweet helps incite further violence and political division.

The article assumes that the Biden administration pushed the FBI to pursue an anti-Catholic agenda due to an alleged memo that gave the agency a green light to pursue innocent Americans based on their faith; however, there is no evidence of a memo, and the whistleblower making the accusation is unnamed. Furthermore, the article lacks sources, and although it claims that this is hard evidence, it proceeds to manipulate its quotations within the body of the article to reinforce the author's opinion.

The article reports that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries supports identifying ICE agents, many of whom wear masks to conceal their identities. It then claims that Democrats want to hand over ICE agents to cartels, which greatly exaggerates the original statement.

This article's headline says Trump threatened Elon Musk with "serious consequences" for donating to democrats. However, Trump's quote says, "If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that." This was in response to a reporter's question about whether Musk plans to support Democratic candidates in the 2026 midterm elections. He doesn't mention specific consequences, let alone serious ones.

This headline is intentionally misleading as the article relies on a study from mice. It admits there is yet to be a study linking the finding of this study to humans.

The article uses language that frames Elon Musk’s allegations about Trump and Epstein in a negative light, describing Musk’s comments as a “tirade” and saying he “crossed the line.” It highlights GOP lawmakers’ strong criticism of Musk while mostly presenting defenses of Trump, often dismissing the claims without much evidence. Some remarks question Musk’s judgment or motives, and the article includes statements from the White House and sources that defend Trump. Overall, the wording and focus create a tone that is critical of Musk and protective of Trump, which could bias readers against Musk’s allegations.

Ro Khanna and Matt Yglesias are not elected democrats. Richie Torres, on the only elected democrat who claimed to be open to reconciling with Musk, is one of the most conservative/sympathetic voting records of any Dem. Every other Democrat lawmaker who has been asked has explicitly said they will not embrace Musk and still consider him a corrupt oligarch. The article cites the words of AOC, Markey, and Jamall Brown calling him a Nazi or wanabee dictator, but none of them have backtracked on that. The opposite in fact. The article is deliberately finding the few outliers who did not say these things about Musk and conflating them with the elected officials who are, to spread a false narrative that democrats are now embracing trump.