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!
Democrat
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 shocking or exciting language at the expense of accuracy, in order to provoke public interest or excitement.
The article's title and content use sensational language by emphasizing the connection to Jeffrey Epstein, which may not be directly relevant to the political donations.
Reframe the title to focus on the political donations without linking to Jeffrey Epstein unless directly relevant.
Headlines that do not accurately reflect the content of the article or are written to exaggerate aspects to attract readers.
The headline suggests a direct and significant connection between Epstein and the political donations, which may not be substantiated by the content of the article.
Ensure the headline accurately reflects the content of the article and does not imply guilt by association.
Language that is partial or prejudiced, favoring one side over another.
The article uses language that could imply guilt by association, particularly in the way it connects Epstein's criminal activities with the political donations made by his associate.
Use neutral language that does not imply guilt by association.
Drawing a general conclusion from a small or unrepresentative sample.
The article may lead readers to generalize the behavior of one individual (the donor) to the candidates or parties receiving donations.
Clarify that the actions of the donor do not necessarily reflect the values or behaviors of the recipients.
Attempting to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.
The article connects emotionally charged criminal activities with political donations, which may lead to an emotional response from the reader rather than a rational analysis of the facts.
Separate the emotional aspects of the criminal case from the factual reporting of political donations.
- 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.