Since it was founded in 1892, the Toronto Star has become Canada’s largest daily newspaper. It is ranked second in Canada — according to World Atlas — reaching over 300,000 people daily.

As a leading digital and print newspaper with a reputation for quality journalism, the question of whether the Toronto Star is biased demands close examination. According to the University of Toronto, the partisanship and ideological leaning of the Toronto Star’s readers are predominantly liberal.

In this article, we will analyze the newspaper’s coverage and editorial decisions to determine if there is a discernible political bias in their reporting. Through our analysis, we hope to provide a comprehensive answer to whether the Toronto Star is biased and shed light on the factors that contribute to media bias in general.

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 the Toronto Star Politically Biased?

Biasly’s Rating for the Toronto Star is based on two scores, one from its computer algorithms which are based on A.I., and one from its Analysts. Biasly rated the Toronto Star with a Computer Bias Score of Somewhat Liberal and an Analyst Bias Score of Somewhat Liberal, which means, overall, it provides political coverage from an American liberal political perspective.

Analyst scores are based on an average of at least 15 articles with each being reviewed by one liberal, moderate, and conservative analyst. The more articles rated by Bialsy’s analyst team for a particular source indicates a more accurate analyst score. As Biasly rates more articles, the scores will become more accurate. Praise for liberal politicians and policies as well as dislike toward Republican policies and politicians contribute to this rating. Biasly’s scores closely align with determinations by other third-party bias research agencies.

The Toronto Star has faced recent criticism by liberals, independents, and conservatives alike for being biased in favor of far-left causes, which was noticed by Canada’s National Observer:

“What also made Torstar stand out was its unabashedly liberal politics in a media business dominated by conservative and pro-Tory outlets – such as Postmedia and the Globe and Mail.”

“The Toronto Star long ago lost its credibility with me by being too closely aligned with the Liberal Party.”

Readers like you are more likely to have a strong opinion of the the Toronto Star based on your political leaning because of their tendency to favor liberal causes and people as represented by Biasly’s “Somewhat Liberal” rating. In the remainder of this article, we’ll talk about ways to identify this bias so you can separate the opinions from the facts and become a more informed consumer of news.

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 the Toronto Star’s Online Articles

Similar Web has discovered that the primary audience of the Toronto Star tends to be between the ages of 25 and 54, both male and female, and mostly interested in News and Media Publishers. Given that the Toronto Star is a high trafficked news source, is it really biased? We’ll look at some of their articles in more detail below to identify the signs.

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.

The first article we’ll examine is entitled “Citing ‘Thought-Provoking’ Anti-Vax Sources, Ontario Judge Rules Couple’s Kids should not be Vaccinated.” Biasly has rated this article as “Somewhat Liberal.” Part of the reason for this rating is that, even though the author tries to maintain neutrality, the tone suggests that she wants others to understand that the COVID-19 vaccine is necessary and anti-vax sources are not to be trusted.

For example, the photograph in this article shows a COVID-19 vaccination next to a sticker saying, “I got my COVID-19 vaccine.” This image may imply a need to receive the vaccination. Additionally, the article’s title frames the judge’s ruling as solely based on these unreputable

anti-vax sources, potentially casting doubt upon the judge’s decision. Influenced by expediency bias, this portrayal may skew public perception by emphasizing only the discredited sources that were used to defend his decision.

The tone is made clear from the get-go of the article when the author states that the anti-vax articles are unreliable:

“In a lengthy ruling, Justice Alex Pazaratz refers to several discredited sources of anti-vax misinformation as ‘actually more informative and more thought-provoking’ than those filed by a Hamilton father who is seeking to vaccinate his children.”

Once she covers the background information of the court case, the author then uses the following sentences in isolation:

“The COVID-19 vaccination has been approved by Health Canada as safe and effective for children aged 12-17. About 90 per cent of Ontario children between those ages have been vaccinated, including the couple’s eldest son.”

This was done to underscore the importance of the issue and make the facts known. This is emphasized by another paragraph, which reads:

“‘Her current concerns about the vaccines are entirely understandable, given the credible warnings and commentary provided by reputable sources who are specifically acquainted with the issue,’ Pazaratz wrote, referring to the mother’s submissions, which cited several discredited sources from the internet.”

Although the diction of the article is not necessarily extreme, it clearly rejects the stance of the Judge and the mother. For example, the author uses the word “polarization” to describe the judge’s ruling. The author also describes Dr. Robert W. Malone as being “widely denounced by medical experts as a high-profile source of anti-vax misinformation.”

In terms of the author herself, Betsy Powell’s Twitter Profile reveals many of her biases and personal opinions in her re-tweeted stories concerning left-leaning topics such as COVID-19, police reforming, and staying masked.

Ontario courts will sit virtually except when absolutely necessary, chief justices say after stay-at-home order – https://t.co/UXQ1QbJbz6 https://t.co/SZgE7BsRRj

— betsy powell (@powellbetsy) January 14, 2021

Today’s most compelling moments during TPSB virtual town hall have come from speakers relating their personal experiences – or fears about police. “I don’t want to die, I just would like to have help from the right people,” said a student who struggles with mental health issues.

— betsy powell (@powellbetsy) July 10, 2020

In the article, Powell consistently demonstrates leaning in selectively gathering quotes from the judge who declared the ruling, but then downplays his statements and beliefs. She also quotes from sources that further her claims of the misinformation from Dr.’s and anti-vax sources. She also makes sure to include quotes in which it seems that the judge is hurting his ruling. For example, she includes this quote in which the judge indicates that the sources that the mother used in the court case, that he already deemed credible, may not be credible:

“Pazaratz said he is not ‘for one moment suggesting that we should presume the mother’s experts are right. But once we determine they’re not crackpots and charlatans, how can we presume that they are wrong? Or that they couldn’t possibly be right.’”

While she did include the facts of the court case overall, her bias was made clear when discussing the anti-vax sources and the support the judge used to justify his ruling. Although the tone throughout the article isn’t very consistent because of the author’s use of experts and evidence, it is clear that she has a tendency to have a left-leaning bias.

To sum it up, the author strives for objectivity for the most part and provides select perspectives from sources that favor the judge’s ruling, but she ultimately spins the story to support one side. All of this suggests that, while some elements of this article were neutral, the article was found to be left-leaning overall, which aligns with our analysis of the Toronto Star as a company with a tendency to lean left in its biases.

Even though this article falls on the left end of the spectrum, article bias can differ between articles and authors, even when they come from the same organization. This shows the importance of looking for the signs of bias — including (but not limited to) tone, tendency, diction, author, and expediency bias — in any article you come across.

To demonstrate, here’s one more article that demonstrates little to no bias throughout and also comes from the Toronto Star: “Law Society Urged to Crack Down on Misleading Legal Ads.” Biasly’s A.I. rating is “Center,” as the language throughout does not provide any forthcoming stances on political views, objectively stating the facts of the matter and avoiding emotionally loaded language that influences the reader’s opinion, while also equally addressing both sides:

“His critics, including several senior lawyers, applauded the move, calling a reprimand a ‘sweetheart deal’ when a suspension was warranted. Diamond, on the other hand, will argue this week that he would never have admitted to professional misconduct had he known he could face a penalty more severe than a reprimand.”

The only trace of bias in this article is the author’s own Tweets concerning left-wing topics; however, these do not seem to influence the content of the article.

Analysis of the Toronto Star’s Opinion Articles

Before we answer this question, we need to draw the distinction between opinion and reporting. While reporting is intended to be neutral, giving the reader the facts and quotes from primary sources to let them form their own opinion, opinions are an outlet for columnists to express their personal views on the issues of the day. While we saw elements of factual reporting in the analysis above, the Toronto Star’s opinion pieces don’t seek objectivity but prioritize putting forth an opinion instead.

Consider the opinion article “Doug Ford is Again Ignoring the Lessons of the Past.” The title is loaded with bias because it contains language suggestive of a negative opinion or judgment about Ford’s intentions or actions. Specifically, the word “ignoring” implies that Ford is refusing to acknowledge past actions, and it is used demeaningly to influence the readers opinion before they read the article.

The preemptive criticism of Doug Ford and the bias present in the title suggests that the author does not intend to provide a fair and objective reporting of the facts. This bias partly influences the leaning of the article to be a left leaning article.

However, the article “Time for Precautions Against Avian Flu” has a more objective title, focusing on informing the reader rather than pushing an agenda. Reliable articles are marked by neutral language and facts from credible sources. Based on the title alone, it could be safely assumed that this article would be less biased than the one previous.

These articles, in addition to those above, are only a small representation of all of the Toronto Star’s content, but they indicate that the outlet is often characterized by a great deal of opinion — further underscoring the importance of knowing how to distinguish subjective writing from genuine reporting.

Who Owns the Toronto Star?

The Toronto Star is owned by the TorStar Corporation. However, Joseph E. Atkinson has had a significant influence on the shaping of the paper’s editorial stance. The paper upheld his beliefs until he passed in 1948. After his passing, his son-in-law took over as the managing editor, and the paper continued to uphold his beliefs. The current president and CEO of TorStar is Marina Glogovac.

She was hired in 2022, and her hiring sparked many to question whether she would continue to uphold the “Atkinson beliefs”. She is more conservative leaning, with tweets about the COVID-19 epidemic resurfacing, in which she was unable to discern what was real and what was fake. She has also had public discussions of COVID being a conspiracy theory. However, it seems that she has had no significant influence on the bias of the paper.

How to Evaluate and Uncover Bias

It can often be difficult to tell if the news you watch is biased. If you have settled on a news channel, it’s usually because you trust the information you are gaining. Unfortunately, many trust the information they are hearing because it confirms what they already believe. This is referred to as “confirmation bias.” It is important to challenge your beliefs and get third-party verification that what you are hearing is the full story. This is why we recommend using Biasly to compare different news stories side-by-side using our bias ratings to figure out what both sides think of a political issue.

Even though Biasly gave the Toronto Star a Somewhat Liberal bias score, remember that bias varies by article, and the Toronto Star does not exclusively publish liberal thought pieces. In fact, it is known to have produced some centrist and conservative-leaning articles before. Additionally, some article types will inherently have more or less bias; general news articles are known for being less biased than opinion pieces. And while every article you read will be biased to some degree, some stick to the facts better than others, which is why it’s so important to use Biasly’s News Check to help you determine the bias of what you read.