Raw Story is a progressive news website focusing on investigative journalism and political commentary. It often highlights stories underreported by mainstream media, offering an alternative perspective on current events. By promoting transparency and accountability, Raw Story plays a significant role in diversifying the media landscape and enriching public discourse.
While it is recognized for its progressive and liberal editorial stance, critics—especially from conservative circles—have accused the outlet of bias in its reporting. They claim that Raw Story engages in selective reporting on issues that align with its political agenda, potentially overlooking stories that do not fit this narrative.
In this article, we will examine the newspaper’s coverage and editorial choices to identify any potential biases in their articles. By equipping you with these tools, we aim to provide a comprehensive analysis that will help you determine whether a news outlet is biased.
How Does Biasly Rate News Sources?
Biasly’s algorithms produce bias ratings to help provide multiple perspectives on given articles. Biasly has analyzed 200,000+ news articles from more than 3,200 news sources through our A.I. technology and team of political analysts to find the most factual, unbiased news stories.
Biasly determines the degree of political bias in news sources by using Biasly’s Bias Meter Rating, in which Biasly’s team analyzes media sources’ reliability and bias and produces three scores, a Reliability Score that measures the accuracy of media sources; an A.I. Bias Score, evaluated by A.I.; and an Analyst Bias Score evaluated by political analysts. These scores are rated based on seven rating metrics including Tone, Tendency, Diction, Author Check, Selection/Omission, Expediency Bias, and Accuracy. These metrics help our analysts to determine the political attitude of the article.
Our A.I. machine-learning system employs natural language processing and entity-specific sentiment analysis to examine individual articles and determine their bias levels. By analyzing the key terms in an article such as policies, bias phrases, political terminologies, politicians, and their nicknames, the algorithms can rate the attitude of the text. Bias scores range from -100% and 100%, with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Is Raw Story Politically Biased?
Biasly’s rating for Raw Story gives the paper a Computer AI Bias Score of Medium Liberal, a score generated by its AI-based algorithms. Biasly’s AI bias analysis focuses on the leaning of tone, opinion, and diction of the author, and their respective tendencies. For example, Biasly has rated its stance on policies such as Anti-Discrimination Laws and Criminal Justice as medium liberal.
Biasly has assigned a Medium Liberal as an Analyst Bias Score. Typically, alongside the Computer Bias Score, Biasly presents an Analyst Bias Score. This score is curated based on a review of at least 15 articles by a team of analysts representing liberal, moderate, and conservative viewpoints. Different types of bias in articles, preferences for liberal or conservative politicians and policies, all factor into generating these scores. The more articles the Biasly analyst team reviews and rates, the more precise the analyst score becomes.
Before we begin, we need to discuss bias. Bias is a natural function of humans, and we can express it both consciously and unconsciously. Bias is one of the most fundamental forms of pattern recognition in humans. This isn’t to lower the bar and say that “all things are biased,” but to explain the process in which we may come to trust certain news organizations that display patterns of coverage.
On the media’s part, there is an incentive to retain audiences, encourage them to purchase subscriptions, and rate products positively. Bias is a two-way street, people want to see news stories about things they care about, and the media needs viewers to continue their operations. This creates a positive feedback loop that influences what stories are covered and from what perspective. This also explains the actions of more liberal news organizations.
Analysis of Bias in Raw Story Online Articles
According to Similar Web, as of October 2024, Raw Story had approximately 23.9 million total visits to their site. Raw Story tends to attract readers who identify as progressive or liberal. The platform primarily attracts readers who identify as progressive or liberal, with a notable focus on younger individuals, particularly those aged 18 to 34. Its audience tends to have higher education levels, often seeking news that challenges mainstream narratives. Additionally, the readership is likely concentrated in urban areas, where progressive values are more prevalent.
How does Raw Story ensure its impartial content appeals to both liberal and conservative readers around the world, given its specific audience?
When determining bias, some of the most common metrics used include Tone, Tendency, Author, Diction, and Expediency Bias, which are the primary metrics we’ll focus on below.
- Tone: This represents the attitude of the writing, formed distinctively but related to the author’s word choices or diction.
- Diction: The specific words chosen by the writer.
- Author: A metric related to the article’s author, taking into account their history of stance on issues based on past articles and social media posts.
- Tendency: measures how consistently an author shows bias in their work, including factors like their tone and perspective.
- Expediency Bias: relates to the immediate impression created by elements like the article’s headline, images, or summary, indicating if they favor a particular viewpoint.
An example of this is “’Do not address a grown woman as ‘Dear”: CNN anchor dresses down Republican”. The expediency bias within the article’s headline creates an immediate impression of confrontation and conflict, suggesting that the anchor is taking a decisive stance against the Republican. The use of “Dear” in the headline conveys a condescending or patronizing tone, which can undermine the credibility of the CNN anchor. By highlighting this word, the headline emphasizes the perceived disrespect or dismissal directed at the female anchor, potentially influencing the audience’s perception of the interaction.
The article maintains a serious tone, highlighting allegations of sex trafficking and misconduct involving a prominent political figure. Tension and confrontation are evident in the discussions among the individuals mentioned in the article.
“Hold on. I’m just going to stop it right here. Because we’re not going to get off on a wrong foot. Please do not address a grown woman as ‘Dear’ in a condescending tone. Do not do that at my table,” she said.
The article employs formal and intense diction to address the allegations and investigation surrounding Matt Gaetz. Phrases like “admonished senators,” “misogyny,” and “drug-fueled sex parties” highlight the gravity and seriousness of the accusations against him. This language emphasizes that the situation is not trivial and demands the reader’s attention.
The author’s tendency within the article presents a critical perspective on the behavior and response of the individuals involved in the Matt Gatez investigations, particularly highlighting the seriousness of the allegations and the reactions of the participants in the discussion. The author’s tone appears to be confrontational as it focuses on the implications of the investigation.
Daniel Hampton serves as a senior editor at Raw Story and previously held the position of news at the Associated Press (Somewhat Liberal). Being a journalist for two liberal news outlets, there is a possibility that the author’s reporting may reflect a liberal bias. This could lead to a focus on negative aspects of the story that align with the author’s ideological leanings while potentially downplaying or omitting counterarguments or perspectives that might offer a more balanced view. Additionally, the choice of language and emphasis on specific details might be intended to shape the reader’s perception in a way that aligns with the author’s viewpoints.
Analysis of Raw Story Opinion Articles
Before addressing this question, it is essential to distinguish between reporting and opinion. Reporting aims to be neutral, focusing on presenting facts and quotes from primary sources, allowing readers to form their own opinions. In contrast, opinion articles give columnists a platform to express their personal views on current issues.
Consider the Opinion article, “MAGA pastor who wants to end female voting rights compares women to pigs.” The title’s language suggests a stark and controversial viewpoint that aims to provoke reactions and debates. By comparing women to pigs, it implies a profoundly demeaning attitude towards women, reflecting extreme misogyny. Additionally, the title aligns with a political ideology that might further polarize readers and spark discussions on gender equality and voting rights.
In the article, the author argues:
“First, he claimed they’re far too pampered: “Pigs with gold nose rings.”
“Trump and his people trying to revisit this history is not the sign of a healthy republic; this is a bright red flashing warning about a country sliding into autocracy,”
“They then claim that this “proof” that availability of mailed abortion pills are causing the drop in pregnancies among girls 15-19 years old is an “injury” to their states because it lowers their potential population.”
“This guy isn’t an outlier; this is the direction the entire GOP has been going for years,”
The author’s language illustrates a distinct bias by using inflammatory language and selective examples that emphasize the extreme positions within the political ideology they criticize. Employing vivid metaphors such as “bright red flashing warning” underscores the perceived absurdity and offensiveness of the pastor’s statements, potentially leading the audience to question the motives and values of those supporting similar ideologies. However, this approach could influence the reader’s perception, leading them to accept the author’s conclusions without considering alternative perspectives.
Another example is an opinion article, “How America became a ‘Mafia State’ — right under our noses”. The language used in the article’s headline suggests that the author believes corruption and organized crime have infiltrated government operations. The term “Mafia State” implies a comparison between the actions of the government and the secretive, coercive tactics commonly associated with criminal enterprises.
In the article, the author argues:
“They would’ve laughed at you if you told them that the richest man in the world would come from apartheid South Africa to hook up with a grifter billionaire to become co-president.”
“As a result, for most of the 20th century prior to the Reagan Revolution, politicians did what the citizens wanted. We got Social Security, the minimum wage, Medicare, unemployment insurance, Medicaid,”
“All of these positions…are overwhelmingly supported by the American people. None can get into law because billionaires or corporations have paid off enough politicians to stop them.”
“This corruption of the “rules of the game” by the Supreme Court has, in turn, attracted criminally disposed sociopaths into government at all levels,”
The author uses provocative language to effectively express intense disapproval and concern about the current state of government. By comparing government actions to those of criminal enterprises, this language aims to create an atmosphere of distrust and underscore the severity of perceived corruption. Terms like “Mafia State,” “grifter billionaire,” and “criminally disposed sociopaths” reflect a bias against specific political figures and systems, potentially resonating with readers who share similar frustrations or skepticism. Such language can heighten readers’ emotions and reinforce existing beliefs, potentially increasing polarization among the audience. It may also inspire those disillusioned with the political system to engage more actively in political discourse or activism.
Both articles illustrate how language can influence readers’ perceptions and emotions. While the first article uses terms like “Mafia State” and “criminally disposed sociopaths” to evoke a sense of corruption and underhanded dealings, the second article might employ different rhetorical strategies to mitigate or amplify these sentiments. This contrast in language can ultimately impact how readers interpret the issues at hand, shaping their attitudes and potentially affecting their engagement with the political system.
Who Owns Raw Story?
Raw Story is owned by Raw Story Media, Inc., which was established by John K. Byrne in 2004. As an independent news outlet, Raw Story is not owned by any large media conglomerate or corporation. This independence allows it to maintain editorial freedom and focus on investigative journalism, especially regarding progressive issues.
John K. Byrne currently serves as CEO of Raw Story Media. Byrne graduated from Oberlin College, where he founded The Grape, an alternative student news and culture magazine. He was also Editor of The Oberlin Review, where he wrote an exposé about steroid abuse on the football team. In its early years, Raw Story focused on reporting on anti-gay political figures who were themselves closeted gays. In 2010, Byrne stepped down as Raw Story’s editor but remains the company’s CEO. In 2018, Byrne and his business partner, Micheal Rogers, acquired the progressive news website AlterNet from the nonprofit Independent Media Institute and The New Civil Rights Movement.
How to Evaluate and Uncover Bias
In summation, it can be easily seen that Raw Story has a medium to moderate-level of Liberal bias. It can be challenging to determine whether the news you consume is biased. When you choose a news channel, it is often because you trust the information. Unfortunately, many people trust sources that simply confirm their preexisting beliefs, a phenomenon known as “confirmation bias.” It is essential to challenge your beliefs and seek third-party verification to ensure that you are getting a complete understanding of the story. We recommend using Biasly to compare news articles side-by-side, utilizing our AI bias ratings to understand the perspectives surrounding a political issue.