Is The Telegraph Reliable?
According to a YouGov poll, The Telegraph is not necessarily untrustworthy, but it is not very trustworthy either. It is likely that The Telegraph does not retain the readership it has because of its standards of news reporting. It likely caters to a specific audience that agrees with the political stances that The Telegraph takes in its articles, and supports The Telegraph, regardless of objectivity.
How to Evaluate Reliability?
Reliability refers to how trustworthy or accurate a news source is. So how do we evaluate a news outlet’s reliability?
There are several potential measures of reliability to look for when determining whether a media source is reliable. Red flags for an unreliable article can include the presence of unsubstantiated claims, facts dependent on unreliable sources, and heavy use of opinionated language. In contrast, hallmarks of a reliable source include:
- Absence of subjective language
- Citing credible sources (e.g., .gov, .edu, academic references)
- Verifiable facts and statistics from multiple outlets
- Use of primary sources, like interviews or transcripts
- Consistency with coverage across other platforms
Biasly’s reliability scores incorporate these elements in evaluating media outlets.
So How Does The Telegraph Fare in Its Reliability?
The political reliability index developed by Biasly assesses both accuracy and trustworthiness. The Telegraph currently holds Average Reliability Score, which is calculated as a weighted average of:
- Fact Analysis Score – Evaluates the accuracy of claims, facts, and evidence.
- Source Analysis Score – Assesses the number, diversity, and credibility of sources and quotes used.
The Telegraph’s Source Analysis Score is Average at 35% Reliable. This suggests moderate trustworthiness in its sourcing practices. The score is AI-generated and considers quote length, frequency, diversity, and quality.
The Fact Analysis Score is yet to be finalized. This score will further determine how well the Tribune supports its claims, addresses selection and omission bias, and presents verifiable evidence. Until this is available, readers are encouraged to perform their own evaluations using Biasly’s media bias tools.
While The Telegraph leans toward factual reporting, occasional lapses—such as unbalanced viewpoints or incomplete data—can affect its reliability rating. These nuances emphasize the importance of analyzing individual articles.
The Telegraph’s Accuracy and Reliability
Although Biasly provides bias ratings that are the average of multiple articles, it is still important to be able to analyze bias within individual articles. It is important to turn towards bias that may affect the factuality of an article.
Two common types of bias that affect factuality include:
- Selection Bias – Highlighting specific stories to fit a presupposed narrative.
- Omission Bias – Purposefully omitting differing perspectives or relevant details to skew perception in favor of a specific side.
Biasly’s accuracy ratings use a scale from 1% (least accurate) to 100% (most accurate). Factors include the presence of supporting evidence, internal and external reliable sources, and balanced viewpoints.
Analysis of Reliability in The Telegraph’s Online News Articles
The Telegraph’s for-profit status and right-wing bias suggest that the news they provide is meant to suit a conservative audience. Most of their writers stem from a conservative or center-right background, meaning that their coverage will favor these perspectives. It is therefore helpful to describe the differences between news and opinion reporting, and how to analyze them for bias individually.
Quality of Sources and Facts Used
Some indicators of reliability within an article are the number of quotes, the length of each quote, and the different perspectives that are represented by these quotes. Let’s analyze the article “A dark shadow looms over Trump’s attempt to woo the Middle East” in terms of these indicators.
The article has 18 quotes, with six of them being medium-length quotes and three of them being long quotes. This suggests an average level of reliability. To better examine the trustworthiness of the article, here is a list of the sources that were quoted in the article:
- Kasra Arabi, a director at United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), a United States-based bipartisan non-profit
- Marco Rubio, United States Secretary of State, a member of the Republican Party
- Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran
- Hugh Hewitt, host of the conservative talk show “The Hugh Hewitt Show”
- Tom Tugendhat, member of Parliament, member of the Conservative Party
- Robert Jenrick, Shadow Lord Chancellor of the United Kingdom, member of the Conservative Party
- Marjorie Taylor Greene, a member of the House of Representatives, a member of the Republican Party
With most sources representing right-wing perspectives, the article likely favors a conservative portrayal of facts. The diction and tone of the quotes used are not explicitly political. However, by only utilizing quotes from conservative perspectives, the article portrays the issue from only one perspective. Without different sources, it is hard to judge whether an article is trustworthy. The reliability of an article is increased when multiple sources corroborate the same account of facts. Articles with high reliability corroborate their facts with sources from different viewpoints. Although this article may seem neutral, it cannot be classified as anything more than of average reliability.
The Telegraph’s article “Trump considers hiring Eric Adams” is a good example of how diverse sources can build up the reliability of an article. Here are some of the sources referenced in the article:
- Eric Adams, an Independent New York City mayoral candidate, won a mayoral bid in 2021 as a Democrat
- The New York Times, an American news outlet, rated “Medium-Left” by Biasly
- RacetotheWH, an American political polling resource
- Andrew Cuomo, an Independent New York City mayoral candidate, a member of the Democratic Party
- Curtis Sliwa, Republican New York City mayoral candidate
- Politico, an American news outlet, rated “Somewhat Left” by Biasly
While the article only has six quotes, the diversity of the sources from an ideological standpoint makes the article more trustworthy. It may seem like the article only portrays liberal standpoints, but Cuomo and Adams are considered to be centrist Democrats. This evens out the ideological spread of the article. Still, the article could improve its reliability by adding more center-right or right-wing sources. By building a narrative that uses multiple perspectives, the article does not seem like it’s taking sides. Also, how these sources are used means a lot, and it appears that this author has portrayed them with a more conservative slant. For example, Andrew Cuomo is quoted as saying:
“Trump himself, as well as top Republicans, will say the goal is to stop Mamdani. And you’ll be wasting your vote on Sliwa. So I feel good about that”.
This attempts to paint Cuomo as a center-right candidate who is a viable option compared to the other Republican candidates. This allows the reader to create conclusions on their own.
Selection and Omission Bias
A good example of selection bias can be seen in the article, “US warns UK abortion buffer zones put ‘shared values’ at risk”. The article highlights the stories of two women, Livia Tossici-Bolt and Rose Docherty, who are both anti-abortion. By portraying the issue of abortion through only their stories, this skews the reader into assuming there is little opposition to these views. It also portrays their views as common sense. The issue of abortion is a nuanced issue that requires multiple perspectives to grasp. To provide a more neutral portrayal of these complex topics, it is best to provide coverage of abortion from an objective standpoint. Presenting facts and multiple viewpoints gives readers a broader grasp of the abortion debate and enables them to form their own conclusions
An example of omission bias can be seen in the article “Britain needs its own Elon Musk to avoid economic disaster”. This article only has a singular quote. It is from the perspective of Andrew Griffith, a member of the Conservative Party. One quote is never enough to gain an understanding of a topic to draw conclusions. The larger issue of this article is that it omits an important side of the argument. Government spending is a contested issue between liberals and conservatives. Each side provides valid arguments for different aspects of government spending. By omitting one side of the argument, the reader is denied a more complete grasp of the issue.
A decent example of an article from The Telegraph that does not have selection or omission bias is “School shootings are just a fact of life, says JD Vance”. This article provides the issue of gun violence from the liberal and conservative perspectives.
“Mr Vance is a strong supporter of Second Amendment rights to bear arms under the US Constitution, and both he and Trump have spoken against proposed federal legislation to make it harder to buy guns, or to ban high-powered weapons.”
“Mr Vance said the four murders in Georgia were a “tragedy” and sent condolences to the families of victims, but reiterated his opposition to gun controls that have been proposed by Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee.”
By presenting both the liberal and conservative stances on gun control, the article does not suffer from selection or omission bias. This article provides a multi-faceted overview of how different political stances treat the issue of gun violence.
So, Is The Telegraph Reliable?
In conclusion, The Telegraph can be considered an outlet that is moderately reliable. Despite its ideological slant, it still retains an average reputation for its journalistic integrity. Still, it is important to assess articles individually, as some articles may differ from Biasly’s reliability rating.
As media literacy improves, readers can more easily detect issues with selection bias, omission bias, and factuality. Use the News Bias Checker to compare how multiple outlets report the same story.
