Previous Troubling Reports

As much as Harris receives criticism on the border issue, the headline is not appropriate nor does it give readers a fair chance to assess her performance. The article is filled with strong negative language bashing Harris. There are better and more respectful ways to critique a politician's handling of a certain issue. Even though there are valid concerns about illegal immigration, the article uses language that makes it an astounding problem, in a way promoting fear-mongering and exaggeration.

In this short article, Republican representative Claudia Tenney of New York gave Newsmax an interview extremely biased against Biden and portrayed what I believe to be falsities that should not be spread on a news platform. Regarding Biden's dealings with 9-11 masterminds, Tenney says that the Biden administration is "pro-criminal" and "they don't support victims." I found it very troubling she said that Biden does not support victims of 9/11 because a man like him, who has dedicated his life to this country, of course, supports victims of something as devastating as 9-11.

There are many reasons why I find this article troubling, the main one being the false narrative that Kamala Harris has done nothing and does not have strong policy stances. I know this to be false, as she was a successful prosecutor in San Francisco and has done a great deal over her career. She also has strong policy stances, specifically on reproductive rights for women. I found O'Leary's perception of Kamala to be rather misogynistic, using negative language and saying she is inferior to Trump, a perception I feel he does not have merit for and, therefore, should not be spread in a news article.

Here Newsmax is reporting on misinformation spread by former President Donald Trump. Donald Trump is known for spreading misleading statements. Here, Newsmax explains that he claims that “Big Tech's censorship of material regarding the assassination attempt on Donald Trump indicates attempts ‘at rigging the election.’” Here is another quote. "Both are facing BIG BACKLASH OVER CENSORSHIP CLAIMS. Here we go again, another attempt at RIGGING THE ELECTION!!! GO AFTER META AND GOOGLE. LET THEM KNOW WE ARE ALL WISE TO THEM, WILL BE MUCH TOUGHER THIS TIME. MAGA2024!” -Trump This type of rhetoric is concerning as it destabilizes the public’s support for democratic institutions.

Reports circulated online that made it out to seem as though Netflix, holistically speaking as a company, donated $7 million to a super PAC supporting Kamala Harris. However, this donation was made by Netflix's chairman and co-founder, Reed Hastings. The false reports and dissemination of exaggerated information has serious potential to harm Netflix's stock and overall popularity among users, which is why it is always crucial to distinguish between a sole proprietor and a corporation.

This report uses colorful language like "praised," "favored," and "charismatic." In doing so, it adds opinion to the article and shows bias when it should not.

This report uses colorful language like "praised," "favored," and "charismatic." In doing so, it adds opinion to the article and shows bias when it should not.

Although they are correct about her not having a press conference, this news is presented negatively. They try to tie her to the actions Joe Biden has done in the past. Additionally, saying she is hiding is a negative sentiment. In a busy campaign schedule, press conferences may have become an afterthought for her. Even with this possibility, the article offers no room for a reason as to why she has not talked to the press. They include commentary from someone who says she is hiding from the press. It is not fair to report such news with negative commentary that does not give the other side a chance to explain themselves.

This article, beginning from the headline, "The Ridiculous Moral Panic Over The Olympics’ Opening Ceremony." is negative. To begin with, it is not without reason that this event caused so much backlash. People have different values and calling it "ridiculous" is a biased and has a negative approach. It completely disregards the other sides value. There could have been more respectful ways to go about it. Even the last statement, "After all, the outrage only shows just how limited in scope their imaginations are." The overall article has a negative and a not so respectful tone. It is very evident that the author has a bias towards conservatives and most statements do not seem to have factual evidences to support them.

This is troubling right off the bat from the title which identifies a clear stance and uses capitalization in "REAL" to catch a reader's attention and be drawn in. Throughout the article the author destroys the Democratic Party using very negative language and phrases such as "sick political nature", "cynical push", "Their sock puppets in the media", etc.

This is troubling news because it ignores the concerns and upsetting nature of the opening ceremony among many viewers. Everyone is entitled to their interpretation of those scenes. Instead of respectfully rejecting the other side's view, the author lays into conservatives with strong language. Saying things like conservatives are not known as tolerant is not appropriate to say in news reporting and shows obvious bias.

This article does not hide the fact that they are opposed to Trump and his policies. This article says that Trump realized abortion and same-sex marriage were some of the party's weakest points. Therefore, according to the author, he softened his stance despite having no intention of following through. Additionally, it was said that the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was "disastrous on many levels," highlighting the clear conservative stance on the issue. Jill said that this attempt to be more moderate seems like a lie, not even attempting to hide the fact that she is anti-Trump and pro-choice. She portrays republican officials as only caring about re-election and knowing what they have to say to do so. He was labeled as untrustworthy, and overall, this piece is highly biased.