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!
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 shocking or exciting statements to provoke public interest or excitement, at the expense of accuracy.
The title and the claim that Biden's debate performance is a 'national security issue' are sensationalist, aiming to provoke a strong emotional response rather than presenting an objective analysis.
Rephrase the title to be more neutral and avoid framing the debate performance as a national security issue without substantial evidence.
Use of language that implies judgment or is slanted towards a particular point of view.
Terms like 'disastrous debate performance' and 'failed miserably' are subjective and imply a negative judgment of Biden's performance.
Use neutral language to describe the debate performance, such as 'controversial' or 'widely discussed'.
Claims made without evidence or based on weak evidence.
The article presents Rep. Ronny Jackson's claims about Biden's cognitive health without providing any medical evidence or professional diagnosis to support these claims.
Provide evidence or expert opinions to substantiate claims about Biden's cognitive health, or present them as opinions rather than facts.
Using the opinion of an authority figure in place of a logical argument or substantial evidence.
The article uses Rep. Ronny Jackson's former position as a White House physician to lend credibility to his claims about Biden's cognitive health, despite the lack of evidence provided.
Clarify that Jackson's statements are his personal opinions and not based on a professional medical examination of Biden.
Leaving out information that is important to understanding the full context of the situation.
The article does not mention that Rep. Ronny Jackson is a member of the political opposition and that his statements could be politically motivated, which is relevant to the reader's understanding of the context.
Include information about Jackson's political affiliation and potential biases to provide a more complete picture of the situation.
- 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.