Previous Troubling Reports

While this article by Carter Sherman doesn't necessarily contain false information, it demonstrates clear bias. The author organizes the information so that the agenda of new presidential candidate Kamala Harris is painted in a positive light, whereas her opponents on the right side of the political spectrum are negatively referenced. There is also not an equal amount of detail provided about the current policies and efforts surrounding the anti-abortion as there is about the pro-abortion campaign. Some perspective is given from conservative groups, but not enough to establish a balanced report in this case. This is problematic because it has the potential to sway readers towards a particular view, especially those who may not be as politically up to date.

To start, the title expresses a bias in favor of Biden by highlighting the fact that he was called a "true friend". Also, many of the quotes speak positively of Biden and his presidency. For example, Ukrainian President Zelenskyy states, "We will always be thankful for President Biden’s leadership. He supported our country during the most dramatic moment in history, assisted us in preventing Putin from occupying our country, and has continued to support us throughout this terrible war..." However, there are no negative quotes about his time in office.

This is troubling news for the way in which it portrays a biased and one sided view of Harris, calling her a joke and other negative terms. Even more concerning is the way in which the author has used quotes to make her look worse such as by using all caps in this quote: "Harris will be even WORSE for the people of our Nation than Joe Biden". The author didn't need to make this choice, but did so anyways to further their argument and emphasize their bias.

I think this is a large claim to make especially towards the President which alone makes it troubling news. But, even more concerning is there is only one person interviewed and thus only one side being shown to represent this strong claim. In the interview, the interviewer himself says using this phrase "cover up" is a strong claim to make, yet no other sources or research are included making it incredibly biased.

I think this is a large claim to make especially towards the President which alone makes it troubling news. But, even more concerning is there is only one person interviewed and thus only one side being shown to represent this strong claim. In the interview, the interviewer himself says using this phrase "cover up" is a strong claim to make, yet no other sources or research are included making it incredibly biased.

The title itself demonstrates bias against Biden, by referring to his presidential campaign in a negative manner. More of the bias against Biden is evident when he states, "One thing is certain: the confusion perfectly captures the helter-skelter mess Biden has created. His misbegotten presidency amounts to a long list of major failures and he should have had the sense a year ago to pass the torch." The author then speaks negatively of Democrats by writing, "If you are a Trump-hating Democrat, you are probably having trouble separating your nightmares from reality." Later, he pushes the idea that Biden will drop out of the race, writing, "Make no mistake — it will be an exit from the race. He’s running out of time and options..." Here, the writer insists that Biden will drop out, when on reality this has not been confirmed.

Most of the article's quotes come from either Trump or Vance, which creates a bias in favor of them. Some of the quotes themselves also place Trump in a postive light. For example, one of Trump's quotes reads, "They keep saying he’s a threat to democracy. I’m saying, ‘What the hell did I do for democracy?’ Last week, I took a bullet for democracy.” Another quote describing Trump states, “He’s not afraid to fight for us and we’re not afraid to fight for him."

This article is misleading because, as the leading members of the Republican party have become more conservative and extremist in some cases, discussions around immigration have dramatically changed. Certainly, the number of people who have shifted their opinions on immigration and oppose it is subject to change at any time. That said, this article does not reflect the increased hostility and negative sentiments spewed toward immigrants that has altered how people feel about the situation. Additionally, the "border crisis" has been at the forefront of policy concerns for a number of politicians and so people are hearing about this more which makes it seem like America is suffering from a dangerous immigration issue. This article shares a real issue, but it is not fully accurate in explaining which American desires on the topic have shifted so prevalently in recent years.

The the elephant in the room for how this article is bias is that the author is former Representative Tim Ryan who ran against JD Vance in the US Senate election in 2022. This alone is already telling of how the article is going sound and feel when read. To add to this, claiming that a candidate is against freedom also seems like a red flag. As much as Americans may disagree adamantly with each other, a claim like this sets a dangerous precedent. Regardless of how much America may stumble at living up to its principles, saying that a candidate is against one of those principles makes that person seem un-American and in turn increase polarization.

This news is troubling because the language is very obviously biased. The article cites quotes from Daniel Dale that have an evident bias. For instance, the article writes "It just went on and on and on in terms of falsehood just like the speech went on and on and on itself." When looking at similar articles addressing lies in Trump's speech, there is a clear difference between unbiasly reporting on this topic and biasly reporting.

First, the title is unspecific about who "all" is referring to. If "all" is implied to be all Americans, this broad of a statement cannot be true and is extremely misleading. The article claims Trump was "bleeding from the head," but he was actually bleeding from the ear. The author states that "there is only one appropriate response" to the Trump assassination attempt, which is a biased opinion. She also describes those who do not share this opinion as people living in a "cesspit," which is extremely harsh and crude language.

First, the title is unspecific about who "all" is referring to. If "all" is implied to be all Americans, this broad of a statement cannot be true and is extremely misleading. The article claims Trump was "bleeding from the head," but he was actually bleeding from the ear. The author states that "there is only one appropriate response" to the Trump assassination attempt, which is a biased opinion. She also describes those who do not share this opinion as people living in a "cesspit," which is extremely harsh and crude language.