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!
Paul Lim
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.
Using slightly dramatic or value-laden language to make an event sound more remarkable or emotionally engaging than a strictly neutral description would.
1) "44 years on from his first World Championship appearance, Lim beat Swede Jeffrey De Graaf, who is 35 years younger than him, 3-1 in a major first round upset." 2) "Ranked 114 in the live rankings, having not previously been ranked, he toppled the sub-par De Graaf, ranked 49th in the world, with an average of 86.52." In (1), calling the result a "major first round upset" is somewhat subjective, though common in sports writing. In (2), describing De Graaf as "sub-par" is an evaluative judgment rather than a neutral description of performance.
Replace "major first round upset" with a more neutral description such as: "44 years on from his first World Championship appearance, Lim beat Swede Jeffrey De Graaf, who is 35 years younger than him, 3-1 in the first round."
If the upset characterization is important, ground it in data: "…3-1 in the first round, an upset given De Graaf’s higher world ranking (49th) compared to Lim’s 114th."
Replace "he toppled the sub-par De Graaf" with a neutral, factual phrasing such as: "he defeated De Graaf, ranked 49th in the world, with an average of 86.52."
If performance quality is relevant, specify metrics instead of labels: "De Graaf struggled to find his best form, averaging X and missing Y darts at doubles."
Using emotionally appealing elements (age, family, crowd support) to create a feel-good narrative that can subtly shape reader perception, even though it is not deceptive.
1) Emphasis on age and longevity: "71-year-old darts star Paul Lim has broken a World Championship record…", "44 years on from his first World Championship appearance…" and "Come on, I'm 70 [sic] years old – I don't need a million pounds." 2) Crowd support: "Lim, who was heavily backed by the crowd inside Ally Pally…" 3) Family angle: "Asked what he would do with the prize money, he said: 'I'd give it to my kids and my grandchildren.'" These elements build a sympathetic, inspirational narrative around Lim, which is normal in sports features but still constitutes mild emotional framing.
Clarify when details are included for context rather than to elicit emotion, e.g.: "At 71, Lim also set the record as the oldest player to win a match at the tournament, according to event statistics."
Balance emotional elements with more performance-related detail: add leg-by-leg stats, checkout percentages, or averages for both players.
When mentioning crowd support, add neutral context: "Lim, who was heavily backed by the crowd inside Ally Pally, a common occurrence for underdogs at this venue…"
Frame the family/prize-money quote as a personal detail rather than a central narrative: "When asked hypothetically about the prize money, Lim joked that he would give it to his children and grandchildren."
Giving significantly more space and narrative depth to one subject than to others, which can create an impression of favoritism even if the facts themselves are accurate.
The article devotes most of its content to Paul Lim’s perspective, quotes, age, history, and potential prize money, while providing minimal information about Jeffrey De Graaf’s performance beyond calling him "sub-par" and noting his ranking. Luke Humphries and Luke Littler are mentioned only briefly and mostly in relation to Lim. This is typical for a feature centered on one player, but it still means the representation of Lim is much richer and more sympathetic than that of the others.
Add a brief, neutral summary of Jeffrey De Graaf’s performance: e.g., "De Graaf averaged X, hit Y 180s, and missed Z darts at doubles."
If available, include a short quote or reaction from De Graaf or his camp to balance the narrative.
Provide a bit more neutral context on Luke Humphries and Luke Littler (e.g., recent form, rankings, titles) so they are not only framed through Lim’s or the crowd’s perspective.
Explicitly signal the article’s focus: "This article focuses on Lim’s record-breaking achievement and his perspective following the match."
- 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.