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!
Donald Trump
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.
The article uses sensational language such as 'malignant assault' and 'harrowing omen' to provoke a strong emotional response.
Use neutral language and avoid emotionally charged terms.
Use of language that is not neutral and shows author's preferences.
Phrases like 'massive gift to Trump' and 'cynical partisan loyalty' indicate a strong bias against the Supreme Court's actions and Trump.
Employ neutral language that does not imply judgment or take sides.
Claims made without evidence to support them.
The article claims that the Supreme Court is 'evidently willing to run interference for Trump' without providing concrete evidence for this assertion.
Provide evidence or acknowledge when a statement is an opinion or speculation.
Attempting to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.
The article appeals to fear and anger by suggesting that the Supreme Court's actions are a 'harrowing indication' that it will not protect democracy.
Focus on factual reporting and logical reasoning rather than emotional appeal.
A fallacy that assumes a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant effect.
The article implies that the Supreme Court's scheduling decision will inevitably lead to Trump evading accountability and subverting democracy.
Avoid suggesting that one action will necessarily lead to a dramatic consequence without evidence.
Presenting one viewpoint without the counterarguments or opposing perspectives.
The article does not present any counterarguments or perspectives that might explain or justify the Supreme Court's scheduling decision.
Include perspectives or statements from those who support the Supreme Court's decision or have alternative explanations.
- 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.