Huge pit visible in Shanghai after viral sinkhole video.

[ 13/02/2026 19:09 ] Read on jamaicaobserver.com

Report Overview: The article is a short, factual news report about a sinkhole at a Shanghai construction site. It mostly relies on observable facts, official statements, and clearly labeled uncertainty. There is minimal evaluative language and no clear attempt to persuade. The main minor issue is a somewhat sensational headline and wording like “gaping” and “dramatic footage,” which slightly amplify the event’s emotional impact but do not distort the core facts.

Sides Objectivity Scores

Local authorities / construction company (94)

Viral video / social media narrative (93)

Sides Representation Balance

Favored Side

Local authorities / construction company

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.

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Sensationalism

Use of dramatic or emotionally charged language to make an event seem more shocking or attention‑grabbing than necessary.

Headline and wording: - Title: "Huge pit visible in Shanghai after viral sinkhole video" - Lead: "A gaping sinkhole was visible at a Shanghai construction site... a day after dramatic footage purporting to show the ground collapsing went viral." The words "Huge", "gaping", and "dramatic" add a slightly sensational tone. The event is real and newsworthy, but the language nudges readers toward a more emotional reaction than neutral wording would.

Change the headline from "Huge pit visible in Shanghai after viral sinkhole video" to a more neutral option such as "Sinkhole visible at Shanghai metro construction site after viral video".

In the lead, replace "A gaping sinkhole" with "A sinkhole" or "A large sinkhole" to describe size without vivid, emotive imagery.

Replace "dramatic footage" with "video footage" or "widely shared footage" to focus on the fact of circulation rather than its emotional impact.

Appeal to emotion

Using emotionally charged descriptions that may influence readers’ feelings more than their understanding of the facts.

Phrases such as: - "dramatic footage purporting to show the ground collapsing" - "dragging temporary building structures into a widening chasm" These descriptions are vivid and cinematic. While they may accurately reflect the video, they emphasize fear and drama rather than simply describing what is known and what is not known about the incident.

Rephrase "dramatic footage purporting to show the ground collapsing" to "video footage purporting to show the ground collapsing".

Rephrase "dragging temporary building structures into a widening chasm" to a more neutral description such as "showing temporary building structures falling into the sinkhole".

Add a clarifying sentence that the primary focus is on safety and investigation (e.g., "Authorities are investigating the cause and assessing any structural risks in the surrounding area.") to balance the emotional impact with practical information.

Unsubstantiated claims (mitigated by clear labeling of uncertainty)

Presenting information that has not been fully verified; in this article, the uncertainty is mostly acknowledged, which reduces the manipulative effect.

The article discusses viral videos: - "Videos circulating widely appeared to show the ground suddenly begin to collapse, dragging temporary building structures into a widening chasm." - "AFP has not been able to confirm these videos are real, with verification tools suggesting there was a chance they had been made or enhanced with AI." The article does a good job of flagging that the videos are not verified, but the descriptive sentence before the disclaimer could be read as partially endorsing the content of the videos.

Move the verification disclaimer before the descriptive sentence, e.g.: "AFP has not been able to confirm these videos are real... Videos circulating widely appear to show..." so that readers see the uncertainty before the vivid description.

Add an explicit reminder that the description is based solely on the unverified videos, e.g.: "According to the unverified videos, the ground appears to begin to collapse..."

Clarify that on‑site observations are separate from the video content, e.g.: "While AFP observed a large crater at the site, it has not confirmed that the viral videos depict this specific incident."

Spread the Truth

Share Report!

- 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.