The Public Broadcasting Station, better known as PBS, has earned a reputation as one of the trusted news sources in the United States. For example, a 2024 poll from YouGov asked Americans about what news sources they trusted and PBS ranked third behind The Weather Channel and BBC. PBS has largely avoided accusations of dishonest reporting, unlike its other mainstream media counterparts.
Given PBS’s reputation as a trustworthy source, it is worth examining its reliability in greater detail. Is PBS as credible as the public says or are there any holes in how they report the news? At Biasly, we endeavor to evaluate the accuracy and dependability of all media outlets. Let us investigate the reliability and accuracy of PBS.
Does Reliability Matter?
Reliability, in general, refers to how trustworthy or accurate information, or in this case, a news source is. If we consider this definition, it quickly becomes clear why reliability is important in media sources. If we can’t trust the things we read then there isn’t much of a point in continuing to consume content from that source, after all. So how exactly can we gauge the reliability of a news source anyways?
There are several potential measures of reliability to look out for when trying to determine whether a media source is reliable or not. Red flags for an unreliable article can include the presence of wild unsubstantiated claims, facts dependent on other unreliable sources, heavy use of opinionated language, and more. Some indicators of a reliable news source, on the other hand, include things like:
- Absence of subjective/opinionated language in articles
- Credible sources cited (e.g., neutral sources, .gov, .edu websites)
- Facts and statistics backed by multiple relevant outside sources
- Use of primary sources when possible (e.g., interviews, quotes)
- Information that remains consistent across news sources
So How Does PBS Fare in its Reliability?
The political reliability index developed by Biasly objectively assesses news organizations’ accuracy and trustworthiness. PBS’s overall Reliability Score has been rated as ‘Good’ by Biasly. This rating is a weighted average of two distinct scores: the Fact Analysis Score and the Source Analysis Score, each evaluating separate components of PBS’s Reliability. When computing the Average Reliability of the article the Fact Analysis score is more heavily weighted. These ratings are as follows in the next two paragraphs:
PBS’s Fact Analysis Score is ‘Excellent,’ which suggests readers can trust its content online. The Fact Analysis score focuses more on the accuracy of claims, facts, and sources presented in the article and any hints of selection and omission bias, which we will discuss further in the article.
PBS’s Source Analysis Score is ‘Fair,’ which suggests readers can trust some of the sources, links, and quotes provided by the news source. This score, which is based on A.I., focuses on assessing the quality of sources and quotes used including their number, lengths, uniqueness, and diversity.
However, since these scores are based on percentages and averages, individual articles could be more or less trustworthy depending on the context, author, and other factors. Our findings show that PBS is a highly reputable news source. They may not gather a lot of sources in their reports but the ones they use are credible and frequently firsthand.
Let us analyze the supporting data for PBS’s rankings and discuss what to watch out for while searching for trustworthy news sources.
PBS Accuracy and Reliability
The credibility of news organizations is significantly impacted by bias and political orientation. PBS reports on the news from a nonpartisan perspective but there have been traces of slight liberal bias from time to time. We can evaluate the integrity of PBS’s news stories and deduce how well the publication supports assertions with evidence and see whether this is indeed the case. We will check for selection and omission bias as we assess the articles’ correctness and factuality.
Selection bias is when stories and facts are selected or deselected, often on ideological grounds, to create a narrative in support of the new sources’ ideology. Omission bias, on the other hand, is when different opinions and political views regarding a situation are left out so that the reader is only exposed to the ideological perspective supported by the author. It’s important to keep in mind these two types of biases when trying to assess an article’s level of accuracy.
Biasly assigns a percentage score to accuracy, with one being the least accurate and 100 being the most. Ratings are calculated by weighing assertions with supporting evidence, the number of reliable internal sources, and the number of reliable external sources employed. A full page at Biasly’s website includes dependability and accuracy ratings for newly released PBS news stories. As we previously stated, according to the reports analytics have assessed, PBS has a Good reliability score. This score can vary from article to article, though, and the most extreme variations in dependability are caused by bias, notably omission, and selection bias.
To showcase what we’re talking about, here’s an example from a source on the other side of the aisle, Breitbart. The conservative website has a “Very Conservative” bias score and a “Fair” reliability score. One of their least biased articles is, “Mitch McConnell: ‘I Would Encourage all Republican Men’ to Receive Coronavirus Vaccine,” with a “Somewhat Conservative” bias rating and “Excellent” reliability score. One of the most biased articles is, “Biden’s Deputies Urge Children To Demand Transgender Status,” with a “Very Conservative” bias score and “Poor” reliability score. As a result, stories displaying political leaning are less reliable than neutral ones.
PBS articles generally have a perfect or near-perfect reliability score because their articles display little to no bias. For example, the article, “As drought cuts hay crop, cattle ranchers face culling herds,” has a “Center” bias rating with a perfect reliability rating. The author, Brittany Peterson, wrote about how a 2021 drought in western Colorado is impacting cattle ranchers. She used quotes from multiple ranchers to provide a clear picture of how the weather impacts their decisions.
“Weather has long factored into how ranchers manage their livestock and land, but those choices have increasingly centered around how herds can sustain drought conditions, said Kaitlynn Glover, executive director of natural resources at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.
‘If it rained four inches, there wouldn’t be a cow to sell for five months,’ said George Raftopoulos, owner of the auction house.
Raftopoulos says he encourages people to think twice before parting with their cows. Having to replace them later on might cost more than paying for additional hay, he said.”
The use of quotes enhances the reliability of the source and gives the audience a unique perspective on an issue they may not know about. Brittany displays no political bias or attempts to sway the audience in any way. Therefore, this is a reliable source.
We will take a closer look at more examples like this below, providing a further investigation into the reliability of PBS’s articles. This will include its use of selection bias, omission bias, and the quality of its sources and facts used.
Analysis of Reliability in PBS Opinion Pieces
Opinion-style journalism is a suitable venue for reporters to express their opinions and beliefs, even if excessive opinion might be something to avoid while producing a general news article. Although opinion pieces are less trustworthy because they are subjective, they can still be worthwhile to read to increase one’s understanding of various political viewpoints.
PBS is unique compared to other mainstream media outlets because it does not have editorials or opinion pieces. They prioritize providing the facts and context to any news story and letting their audience come to their own conclusion. Whenever they have correspondents discuss issues, they’ll try to balance it by inviting two people from different sides of the aisle. PBS commits to neutrality and presents both sides while sticking to the truth and facts.
Quality of Sources and Facts Used
PBS is good at using reliable sources from both sides of the ideological divide and citing facts as evidence. A good example of this is the article, “WATCH: House investigation of Jan. 6 attack begins with police testimony.” Authors Eric Tucker, Kevin Freking and Padmananda Rama used 22 quotes: 8 short, 11 medium length, and 3 long ones. Longer quotes can indicate higher reliability if the source is reputable.
The sources in this article are primarily from congresspeople in Washington and people who delivered testimonies at the January 6th Committee hearings. They include the following:
- Capitol Police Officer Aquilino Gonell
- Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone
- C. police officer Daniel Hodges
- Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn
- Bennie Thompson (liberal-leaning)
- Liz Cheney (conservative-leaning)
- House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy (conservative-leaning)
- Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (liberal-leaning)
- Adam Kinzinger (conservative-leaning)
- Andrew Clyde (conservative-leaning)
- Paul Gosar (conservative-leaning)
It may seem that there is an imbalance of sources that favor the conservative perspective but not all Republicans hold the same view on issues like January 6th. For example, Kinzinger and Cheney spoke about the dangers of the insurrection at the Capitol. Below is one of Cheney’s statements from the hearing.
“The question for every one of us who serves in Congress, for every elected official across this great nation, indeed, for every American is this: Will we adhere to the rule of law, respect the rulings of our courts, and preserve the peaceful transition of power?”
Cheney’s perspective was shared by Democrats. Meanwhile, other Republicans downplayed the attack on the Capitol. For example, Andrew Clyde described January 6th as, “a normal tourist visit,” and his sentiments were shared by some of the most extremely conservative members in the Republican Party. Just because multiple sources appear conservative on the surface doesn’t mean they’re all the same.
Overall, the sources are fairly balanced with a good mix of perspectives from the left, right, and people not affiliated with either major political party. The authors do not omit key information about the hearings and allow readers to watch the entire thing if they want to. This is how PBS generally goes about their work.
Selection and Omission Bias
PBS prioritizes giving their audience a full picture of the situation and will frequently showcase both sides of an issue. A good example of this is a July 2024 news segment, “Brooks and Atkins Stohr on Biden’s vow to stay in the race for the White House.” It features conservative columnist David Brooks from The New York Times and liberal columnist Kimberly Atkins from The Boston Globe. They discussed President Joe Biden staying in the presidential race despite calls within his political party to withdraw, whether the country is losing sight of the stakes in the 2024 election, and the rise of right-wing populism around the world. There is no selection or omission bias in these pieces.
“Kimberly Atkins Stohr, The Boston Globe:
Look, the president has already done what Democrats were waiting for. They needed him to make the decision as to whether he would be the nominee or not. We are past the primaries.”
“David Brooks:
Well, he could take a cognitive test, which is what I think he should do over the weekend.
And then people aren’t worried about — they’re sort of worried about now, but, really, they’re worried about 2027, what Joe Biden is going to be like in 2027, if he’s still president.”
Beyond the two correspondents, PBS also balanced their sources with additional quotes from people on the left and right. They included quotes like this one from Abigail Disney, a film producer and Democratic donor.
“This is realism, not disrespect. Biden is a good man. He served his country admirably, but the stakes are far too high”
There were also quotes from former Donald Trump Chief Strategist, Steve Bannon, on how a potential first year in office for Trump in 2025 would compare to 2017.
“It’ll be nothing like 2017. In 2017, we didn’t have staff. We had nothing. But now we have got people who have been vetted. We have got people who are trained and we’re just going to go after the deep state.”
PBS’s audience primarily consists of people who want to be informed on the issues with no strong political leanings one way or the other. Therefore, PBS has an incentive to appeal to its audience with relatively balanced, nonpartisan coverage.
So Is PBS Reliable?
Finally, it can be argued that PBS is a reliable news source because they always rely on credible sources to gather information, present the full story, and hold themselves to a high standard for journalistic integrity. The more you research media reliability and accuracy, the simpler it will be for you to spot problems with sources, selection, omission, and factuality. To help with this, you can use Biasly’s News Bias Checker to uncover reliability problems and assist you in finding the most accurate and dependable news.