Chicago Tribune Article Rating

Letters: Tribune Editorial Board and Paul Vallas ignore Chicagoans' needs

Jan 08, 2025 View Original Article
  • Bias Rating

    54% Medium Conservative

  • Reliability

    50% ReliableFair

  • Policy Leaning

    34% Somewhat Conservative

  • Politician Portrayal

    -30% Negative

Bias 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

Overall Sentiment

-8% Negative

  •   Liberal
  •   Conservative
SentenceSentimentBias
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan.

Bias Meter

Extremely
Liberal

Very
Liberal

Moderately
Liberal

Somewhat Liberal

Center

Somewhat Conservative

Moderately
Conservative

Very
Conservative

Extremely
Conservative

-100%
Liberal

100%
Conservative

Bias Meter

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

65% : No one is addressing all together the Chicago Police Department's shorthandedness, the large-scale absence of 311 and traffic enforcement, the plight of the public schools, and the broken condition of streets and sidewalks.
55% : The public may be left with the perception that public employees will earn Social Security on top of pensions for the same work.
54% : Regarding the editorial "How property tax increases became a new third rail in US politics" (Jan. 6) and Paul Vallas' op-ed "Council can address the financial crisis to come if it begins now" (Jan. 3): The Tribune Editorial Board joins failed mayoral candidate Vallas in railing against taxes and imagining major city budgeting with absolutely no attention to the needs of Chicagoans and the broken physical state of the city.
54% : For example, if someone worked in a corporate job for 20 years and then became a public school teacher, they would now be able to collect the full amount of what they earned paying into Social Security for 20 years, which would be completely separate from whatever they earn toward a public pension.
39% : Actually, the bill rectifies the unfair practice of cutting Social Security for the private sector work these employees have done.

*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.

Copy link