Disingenuous defenses of critical race theory
- Bias Rating
36% Somewhat Conservative
- Reliability
N/AN/A
- Policy Leaning
-54% Medium Liberal
- Politician Portrayal
30% Negative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
Continue
Continue
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates. Already a member: Log inBias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
N/A
- Liberal
- Conservative
Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
---|---|---|
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan. |
Reliability Score Analysis
Policy Leaning Analysis
Politician Portrayal Analysis
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Contributing sentiments towards policy:
61% : In Idaho, for example, the law tells public schools they cannot "compel students to personally affirm, adopt or adhere to" noxious ideas, such as one race "is inherently superior or inferior" or that an individual "should be adversely treated on the basis of race."60% : They derided as "un-American" laws passed by states such as Texas, Florida, Idaho, Oklahoma, Arkansas and New Hampshire that prohibit public schools from promoting the core principles of critical race theory, including race essentialism, collective guilt and state-sanctioned discrimination.
60% : First, they could support a ban, in which case their disagreement on the critical race theory ban would be partisan, not principled; or second, they could oppose a ban, which would be internally consistent, but atrocious on moral and practical grounds -- a state should absolutely prohibit public schools from promoting Klan ideology.
60% : These citizens understand implicitly that public schools are being devoured by a hostile ideology that seeks to divide the country by race and undermine the core principle of democratic control.
59% : Public schools, which have the power of compulsion, are pushing toxic racial theories onto children, teaching them that they should be judged on the basis of race and must atone for historical crimes committed by members of their racial group.
57% : Even under the most dogmatic libertarian philosophy, monopoly conditions justify, even require, government intervention.
50% : But isn't some kind of speech restriction inevitable, even obligatory, in public schools?
48% : The First Amendment was designed to protect citizens from the government, not to protect the government from citizens.
40% : The status quo puts an extreme burden on individual families, while shielding public school from democratic oversight and accountability.
24% : This might be true as a matter of pure legal theory, but in reality, thousands of public schools are already engaging in these abusive practices and most parents do not have the resources to file a federal civil-rights lawsuit at every infraction -- and the Biden administration has dropped all enforcement against critical race theory in public education, eliminating another avenue of protection.
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.