Previous Troubling Reports

Trump is saying vaccinations are being given to babies that radically change them, when this has never been proven to be true. Additionally, he says some of these vaccinations have 38 different types of vaccinations in them, which does not exist. This is concerning because people look up to him and he is spreading false information to them.

The headline of this article is very misleading and is false. The Harris campaign said that, "the plan aimed to accelerate "the spread of electric vehicles, solar panels, and wind turbines" and make big investments "in battery storage, climate-smart agriculture, advanced manufacturing, and the innovative technologies that will build our carbon-free future. The headline makes readers think that Harris will take away their gas-powered cars (though not true) and could influence the way they feel about her as a candidate.

This news is particularly troubling for the way it displays clear bias against Harris's virality to push a narrative about the Democratic Party's unauthentic methods for gaining support. The author criticizes Harris's "memeability" and left-leaning media outlets such as NYT for celebrating her internet fame. They bring in sources that make the argument that Democrats are operating in a "post-coherence landscape," which is a threat to democracy, however, they don't bring in any sources arguing against this narrative or providing a different perspective. Therefore, it is evident that the author is showing clear bias towards the opinion that Harris's internet fame is damaging to the political landscape.

This news is particularly troubling for the way it displays clear bias against Harris's virality to push a narrative about the Democratic Party's unauthentic methods for gaining support. The author criticizes Harris's "memeability" and left-leaning media outlets such as NYT for celebrating her internet fame. They bring in sources that make the argument that Democrats are operating in a "post-coherence landscape," which is a threat to democracy, however, they don't bring in any sources arguing against this narrative or providing a different perspective. Therefore, it is evident that the author is showing clear bias towards the opinion that Harris's internet fame is damaging to the political landscape.

This is troubling because it portrays only the failures of Kamala without correctly balancing her strengths.

This is troubling because it simply lists the conspiracies without making clear that they are fake. The headline needs to make it clearer.

This is troubling because it simply lists the conspiracies without making clear that they are fake. The headline needs to make it clearer.

This is troubling because it simply lists the conspiracies without making clear that they are fake. The headline needs to make it clearer.

This is troubling because it simply lists the conspiracies without making clear that they are fake. The headline needs to make it clearer.

This is troubling news because it's demonstrably false; no one with the most elementary knowledge of American policy or political philosophy would term Kamala Harris a "left-wing ideologue," even her critics. It's all the more embarrassing to see this dreck published in the name of the Examiner's entire editorial board. What's more, the diction and tone of this article make it clear that the authors have no interest in even-handedly assessing Harris' record and calling her an "absolutist", "radical", and a "zealot" when all of those things are demonstrably untrue, risks poisoning honest discussion and inhibits real criticism.

This article has a clear bias against the Secret Service. It insinuates that the attempted assassination of Trump is an inside job. There is no evidence to support this, and these are false claims.

This article has a clear bias against Kamala Harris. It continually paints her as a liar and insinuates that she will be worse than Biden. However, they have no facts or evidence to back these claims up.