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!
Israel
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 phrase 'would-be genocidaires of Hamas' is sensationalist, implying an intent to commit genocide without providing evidence for such a serious accusation.
Provide evidence for the claim or use more neutral language to describe the conflict.
Language that is partial or prejudiced towards particular views or groups.
Terms like 'Israel-hating left wing' and 'ugly, false and beloved-by-the-left narrative' show clear bias against a political group.
Use neutral language to describe political groups and their positions.
Claims made without evidence or support.
The article claims that the Biden plan would 'hand victory to the terrorists' without providing evidence or analysis to support this claim.
Provide evidence or expert analysis to support the claim.
Attempting to manipulate an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.
The article appeals to fear by suggesting that the Biden plan would be a 'disaster for both the Jewish state and the Gazans that Hamas preys upon' without a balanced discussion of the plan's potential merits or drawbacks.
Present a balanced analysis of the plan's potential outcomes.
Headlines that do not accurately reflect the content of the article or are intentionally sensationalized to attract readers.
The headline 'Joe Biden’s Rafah plan is meant to save his own skin, not Israel' suggests a motive without providing evidence within the article to support such a claim.
Rephrase the headline to reflect the content of the article more accurately.
Selecting evidence that supports one's argument while ignoring evidence that contradicts it.
The article presents only the negative aspects of the Biden plan and the positive aspects of Israel's actions, without acknowledging any potential downsides or complexities.
Include a range of perspectives and data points to provide a more balanced view.
Drawing an equivalence between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning.
The article implies a false equivalence between the Biden administration's plan and a victory for terrorism, without substantiating how the plan equates to such an outcome.
Avoid equating political decisions with extreme outcomes without clear evidence.
- 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.