Previous Troubling Reports

This article heavily favors Trump and his plan to possibly get rid of personal income taxes and replace them with tariffs, therefore starting a "revolution" in new policy. The author paints this all in a very positive light, but fails to mention that most Americans do not pay any federal income taxes, and they would presumably fall under Trump’s tariff plan. Ultimately, this would be a huge tax increase on the lower and middle class in America - which the author fails to mention.

This post, like many mediums that use misinformation, heavily obscures fact and opinion. Most of the article is taken up with statements of fact: Twitter threads from Tyler Cherry, a new member of the Biden White House communications staff. It is true, Tyler Cherry is a controversial figure for his past radical posts about defunding ICE and that the Police are Slave patrols. This is undeniable: he has (in the past, according to his Twitter), held such beliefs. What makes this post misinformation is the declaration, "But on ideology? Cherry and Biden are a perfect match." This is just conjecture and can be disproven by researching Biden's border policies. Sure, they are less forthright than Trumps; however, recent news of his proclamation under Immigration and Nationality Act sections 212(f) and 215(a) which suspends illegal immigrants is hardly anti-ICE or anti-border. Again, depending on your interpretation of this post, it can be either seen as misinformation or simply a heated opinion piece. In my opinion, given that they equate Biden's policies with radical tweets on border policy, this news article is both misinformation and inflammatory.

This post, like many mediums that use misinformation, heavily obscures fact and opinion. Most of the article is taken up with statements of fact: Twitter threads from Tyler Cherry, a new member of the Biden White House communications staff. It is true, Tyler Cherry is a controversial figure for his past radical posts about defunding ICE and that the Police are Slave patrols. This is undeniable: he has (in the past, according to his Twitter), held such beliefs. What makes this post misinformation is the declaration, "But on ideology? Cherry and Biden are a perfect match." This is just conjecture and can be disproven by researching Biden's border policies. Sure, they are less forthright than Trumps; however, recent news of his proclamation under Immigration and Nationality Act sections 212(f) and 215(a) which suspends illegal immigrants is hardly anti-ICE or anti-border. Again, depending on your interpretation of this post, it can be either seen as misinformation or simply a heated opinion piece. In my opinion, given that they equate Biden's policies with radical tweets on border policy, this news article is both misinformation and inflammatory.

This is troubling for me as the title is already incredibly biased and making it easy for the reader to fall for such bias by capitalizing words and using quotes around strong phrases. It is very negative towards two particular politicians including one of the politicians included in the title, making it unbalanced. The sources aren't very diverse, only contributing more to the bias.There are fewer quotes included in the article, and the ones included are short which could be concerning.

The article I found details the fake news surrounding an incident that happened at Biden's fundraiser in LA recently. A video is circulating of Biden and people are using it to add on to the notion of him being confused and too mentally unwell to fit as president. However, many at the event claim that Biden was simply taking in the applause or trying to hear some of the people over the notice. We cannot truly know what happened, but many are using it to spread the fake news being created to support the idea of Biden's inability to be fit for president.

The author barely uses quotes to support their information; there are only two throughout the whole article. Another concerning detail about the quotes--such as "double haters"--is that they are very short. Also, all of the other articles that are cited come from AP News's website.

The content of the article is accurate as they take information from Reuters study. However, the most concerning part is the title of the article. The Reuters report is about where Americans get their news from. Newsmax did have 8% watch rate amongst Americans. However, the article uses this number to claim that Newsmax is a top news brand and that this figure makes it one of the more reputable news sources.

The narrative surrounding Paulette Harlow's conviction to 2 years in prison is incorrect. Many believe she was being convicted for praying outside this clinic, when in reality she used physical force and obstruction to create a blockade at the clinic. Paulette is being charged for 2 felonies: taking part in the blockade of the Washington Surgi-Clinic and felony conspiracy against civil rights and violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. This is concerning as many people are using this fake news to fuel their hatred towards the justice system and their belief of the unfair ruling against Donald Trump. While it is valid to be concerned about our current justice system, people must make sure the media they are reading is accurate.

This news isn't troubling so much as its just showing bias. It does seem correct and factual however it has a clear negative bias towards Trump and is very liberal. A selection bias is present here as there has been no fact-checking of Biden's rally but only Trump's.

This news is troubling to me largely because of the headline. The headline makes it seem as if Judge Judy is saying that Trump being prosecuted is nonsense, or that her specific opinion should show people that his conviction was invalid. Of course Judge Judy knows her stuff as an attorney/judge, she is not the foremost expert on this specific criminal topic and the article title makes it seem that her thought should hold great weight. The headline is also misleading because she does not say that the verdict itself was invalid, but more so that figuring out the crime was difficult. Ultimately, however, he was convicted by a jury of his peers so calling into question the legitimacy of the trial is misleading, especially to people who see that Judge Judy has commented this sort of thing about it.

This news is troubling to me largely because of the headline. The headline makes it seem as if Judge Judy is saying that Trump being prosecuted is nonsense, or that her specific opinion should show people that his conviction was invalid. Of course Judge Judy knows her stuff as an attorney/judge, she is not the foremost expert on this specific criminal topic and the article title makes it seem that her thought should hold great weight. The headline is also misleading because she does not say that the verdict itself was invalid, but more so that figuring out the crime was difficult. Ultimately, however, he was convicted by a jury of his peers so calling into question the legitimacy of the trial is misleading, especially to people who see that Judge Judy has commented this sort of thing about it.

While this news isn't necessarily directly "fake news," since it reports a real event that took place, this article nonetheless goes beyond the scope of what should be acceptable in news. Clearly an opinion piece, this article claims that retracting a single mask from an exhibit due to cultural concerns constitutes the title "Women Are Latest Victim of Identity Politics." Oxford removed a single piece from a museum. This event does not amount to the exaggerated claims made in the article. The author goes further, attacking academics for their character instead of actual claims or writings they've posted. This article is harmful to the spirit and good-faith of journalism.