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!
Policymakers
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.
The article relies on a mix of named and anonymous sources, which may skew the representation of opinions.
The study draws on interviews, some anonymous, with nearly a dozen current and former U.S. intelligence officials and policymakers.
Provide a more balanced range of sources, including those with differing viewpoints.
The article focuses more on the negative aspects of the intelligence community's relationship with policymakers, potentially giving an unbalanced view.
The article emphasizes the intelligence community's tendency to bias reports to please policymakers, with less focus on instances where the intelligence community may have resisted such pressures.
Include examples or statements where the intelligence community maintained objectivity despite political pressures.
The article may omit information that could provide a more nuanced understanding of the intelligence community's actions.
The article does not provide much detail on the methodology of the RAND study or the context in which the intelligence community's actions took place.
Include information on the RAND study's methodology and the broader context of the intelligence community's actions.
The article may selectively report information that confirms a pre-existing narrative of intelligence manipulation.
The article presents a series of examples that support the narrative of intelligence manipulation across administrations, potentially ignoring counterexamples.
Present information that challenges or complicates the narrative of consistent intelligence manipulation.
The article cites authorities to support its claims without necessarily providing evidence for their assertions.
Quotes from former national intelligence officer Paul Pillar and former CIA Director Michael Hayden are used to support the article's claims without independent verification.
Provide evidence or data to support the claims made by authorities cited in the article.
- 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.