Media Manipulation and Bias Detection
Auto-Improving with AI and User Feedback
- Objectivity Score
- Objectivity Score
- Objectivity Score
- Objectivity Score
- Objectivity Score
- Objectivity Score
Media Manipulation and Bias Detection
Auto-Improving with AI and User Feedback
HonestyMeter - AI powered bias detection
CLICK ANY SECTION TO GIVE FEEDBACK, IMPROVE THE REPORT, SHAPE A FAIRER WORLD!
Republicans
Caution! Due to inherent human biases, it may seem that reports on articles aligning with our views are crafted by opponents. Conversely, reports about articles that contradict our beliefs might seem to be authored by allies. However, such perceptions are likely to be incorrect. These impressions can be caused by the fact that in both scenarios, articles are subjected to critical evaluation. This report is the product of an AI model that is significantly less biased than human analyses and has been explicitly instructed to strictly maintain 100% neutrality.
Nevertheless, HonestyMeter is in the experimental stage and is continuously improving through user feedback. If the report seems inaccurate, we encourage you to submit feedback , helping us enhance the accuracy and reliability of HonestyMeter and contributing to media transparency.
Use of exciting or shocking stories at the expense of accuracy, to provoke public interest or excitement.
Phrases like 'use their might to spy on the right', 'Stank of America', and 'self licking ice cream cone' are sensationalist and designed to provoke a strong emotional response rather than provide an objective report.
Remove emotionally charged language and present the facts in a neutral tone.
Language that is biased or contains a partial perspective.
The article uses biased language such as 'so much as bought a jock strap at Dick's, then you could have ended up on a federal target list' and 'if you so much as buy a wiffle ball bat at Dick's, pay cash'.
Use neutral language that does not imply guilt or target a specific group without evidence.
Attacking an opponent's character rather than answering their argument.
The article includes ad hominem attacks like 'excuses are as weak as Joe's urine stream' and 'anal warts and Joy Reid, they just don't go away'.
Remove personal attacks and focus on the substantive issues at hand.
Claims made without evidence to support them.
The article makes claims such as 'if you ever stood for the national anthem, watch your back' without providing evidence for why standing for the national anthem would result in surveillance.
Provide evidence for claims or clarify that they are the author's opinion.
Attempting to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.
The article appeals to emotion with statements like 'if you so much as buy a wiffle ball bat at Dick's, pay cash' and 'make sure your tax returns are perfect or maybe it's time to start living your life under the radar'.
Present information without attempting to provoke fear or other emotional responses.
A logical fallacy in which two opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not.
The article implies a false equivalence by comparing the investigation of Jan. 6 to hypothetical scenarios like 'if Trump asked Planned Parenthood for all the records on women who had abortions'.
Avoid comparing unrelated scenarios and focus on the specific issue being discussed.
- This is an EXPERIMENTAL DEMO version that is not intended to be used for any other purpose than to showcase the technology's potential. We are in the process of developing more sophisticated algorithms to significantly enhance the reliability and consistency of evaluations. Nevertheless, even in its current state, HonestyMeter frequently offers valuable insights that are challenging for humans to detect.