Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

New platforms help overcome biased news reporting

news app
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

With so many media outlets in the world today, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find unbiased news, if not distinguish fact from fiction. News consumers’ reliance on social media, algorithms and preferred media outlets often ends up reinforcing opinions rather than helping develop independent, unbiased views.

And while 78 percent of Americans said that “it is never acceptable for a news organization to favor one political party over others when reporting the news,” according to the Pew Research Center, bias has seeped into the majority of news outlets, making it increasingly difficult for consumers to receive news that is nonpartisan.

But there are a growing number of platforms that want to help people understand media bias and improve their news consumption habits.


Take, for example, Kamy Akhavan, a former CEO of ProCon who has dedicated much of his career to promoting civil communication and improving civic education. Akhavan formed ProCon to reflect his passions while delivering non-biased information through “beneficial confusion,” a technique that offered opposing viewpoints on a wide range of political, social and policy issues so readers could “engage in evaluative thinking to formulate their own views,” he explained.

“The goal is not to persuade but rather to educate,” he said. “The goal is to let the reader come to their own conclusions and judge for themselves what they want to do with that information.”

He also stressed the importance of education when discerning between biases, claiming, “The problem associated with a lack of media literacy are really an outgrowth of the fact that we have 24/7 news cycles and thousands of media sources, including citizen journalism, which may be well intentioned, but oftentimes isn't very good.”

AllSides, led by CEO John Gable, has followed a similar approach, hoping to expose individuals to different ideas and information from all sides of the political spectrum to provide a fuller picture. They have also created the AllSides Media Bias Rating to help readers understand a news platform’s slant.

Gable focuses on helping people who want to solve problems, because they are ones who will bring about change. “Enable them to see the different sides, enable them to understand what's really going on, enable them to share and be open about it so that they aren't overly attached and have to hide their true opinions behind some kind of wall,” he said.

Among the media platforms that earned “center” ratings on the AllSides media bias chart:

  • Axios
  • BBC
  • Christian Science Monitor
  • Reuters
  • Wall Street Journal news (the WSJ opinion section leans right)

(The Fulcrum also earned a “center” rating from AllSides.)

AllSides has also become dedicated to ending polarization. The platform has been focused on fighting “filter bubbles,” a phenomenon that occurs when people are only exposed to ideas, news and conversations that align with their own beliefs. AllSides hopes to combat polarization by equipping individuals with knowledge and empathy to engage in productive dialogue through the dissemination of a broad range of perspectives.

Gable added that along with information that conforms to a person’s beliefs, “you need the difference, the arguments and the unexpected ideas” to overcome divides and hatred for the opposing side.

He is hopeful for the future of news media—an unusually optimistic outlook given the continuing downward trend regarding Americans’ trust in the media. Gable believes the key to turning around the news industry is overcoming misinformation: “The way to deal with misinformation is not by trying to control it, but by debunking it in a world of open ideas and data.”

Large media corporations like Yahoo News and even Facebook have begun to incorporate technology that discourages misinformation and questions the credibility of their news sources. For example, Yahoo News has just acquired The Factual, a company focused on rating the credibility of news sources through different algorithms and technologies.

Other sources for balanced perspectives and media ratings include:

  • NewsGuard, a browser extension that provides ratings on media platforms.
  • The Flipside, a newsletter that shares perspectives from the right, middle and center on some of the biggest issues of the day.

While ProCon, AllSides and others like them are designed to help news consumers, Akhavan would prefer to see solutions that attack the issue earlier, such as developing critical thinking skills in K-12 education. He suggests that children should be taught to “to question the accuracy of the information to question whether or not there's multiple perspectives in a particular presentation or single perspectives, to see if any of the languages that tended to be persuasive or whether the language is intended to be informative.”

This skill, coupled with a media literacy proficiency, would better equip Americans to recognize biases and arm them with the tools to overcome deceptions from a single, possibly misinformed, media source. Instead, they would be more likely to look for different viewpoints, question the credibility of their sources, and formulate an opinion for themselves.


Read More

The U.S. Pentagon.

Buried in the 2027 NDAA, Section 224 could fundamentally reshape U.S.-Israel defense ties. Is Congress creating an irreversible military partnership?

Getty Images, Westend61

America Should Stay Single

As we wait to see what comes of ceasefire negotiations between the United States and Iran, the House just released its 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Buried within it lies Section 224, titled the “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,” a provision representing what would be a radical departure from how we work with even our strongest allies, turning America’s relationship with a close collaborator into a permanent military-industrial integration. The U.S. has worked with NATO partners on co-production and shared supply chains in the past, but never like this. Many are calling it a merger. We should all be calling it off.

Section 224 could inextricably link the fate of our country’s defense to another’s. The Secretary of Defense would be directed to designate an executive agent to fuse ventures with Israel so significantly that it would touch almost every area of defense tech: AI, autonomous systems, energy, cyber, biotech, and beyond. It also proposes “network” and “data fusion,” which means, as the director of the Democratizing Foreign Policy program at the Quincy Institute warned, “the U.S. military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data.America First may soon sound more like a sarcastic punchline than a platform.

Keep ReadingShow less
AI Could Save Thousands—So Why Is Healthcare Still Hitting the Brakes?

Discover how generative AI in healthcare could reduce misdiagnoses, improve chronic disease management, and save hundreds of thousands of lives—if policymakers accelerate adoption instead of waiting for risk-free perfection.

Getty Images / Pakorn Supajitsoontorn

AI Could Save Thousands—So Why Is Healthcare Still Hitting the Brakes?

Imagine that the only way Americans traveled was on foot or on horseback. And assume that 100,000 people died each year because they couldn’t reach a hospital in time or firefighters arrived too late.

Suddenly, they learned that thanks to a technological breakthrough, cars and trucks will become widely available within three years.

Keep ReadingShow less
This 3D rendered image shows a central AI processing chip sitting atop a glowing blue printed circuit board.

Can AI profit-sharing help workers? Examining public wealth funds, AI taxes, economic transition policies, and the future of work.

Jason marz / Getty Images

There’s No Easy Path Through the AI Transition

“Trending” policy ideas tend to garner attention for all the wrong reasons: they seem like silver bullet solutions that will save us from taking on much harder reforms. Proposals to share profits from leading AI companies with the public are the latest example. It’s the rare policy scheme that seems to have united President Donald Trump, Senator Bernie Sanders, and CEOs at the leading AI labs. While the proposals for AI profit sharing vary in their precise details, a quick review of their likely outcomes should quickly deflate the popular excitement that has formed in response to calls for new taxes, public wealth funds, and the like. It’s important to reveal such limitations so that the AI policy discourse can move on to mechanisms more likely to address the real concerns of the American people.

In our first hypothetical world, the two leading AI labs—Anthropic and OpenAI—give away 3% of their equity. That’s not nothing! Based on current figures, such a contribution could kickstart a public wealth fund of about $55 billion. Let’s then imagine that fund earns 10% a year (a big “if” but let’s run with it). Per The Economist, this AI would reach a staggering $140 billion within ten years. How much would that benefit Americans? If annual payouts were 4% — what the publication reports is a proper amount to keep the fund going and growing — Americans would have an extra $20 in their pocket.

Keep ReadingShow less
For Imre Huss, Fixing Democracy Starts With Talking to a Stranger
a couple of people sitting at a table with cups of coffee

For Imre Huss, Fixing Democracy Starts With Talking to a Stranger

The Democracy Architects Council, presented by The Bridge Alliance Education Fund and Civics Unplugged, offers a paid, one-year fellowship for eight fellows ages 18 to 28, each selected for their work across a distinct sector of democratic life.

The youngest member of the Democracy Architects Council is building AI-powered civic tech, but he says the real work of democracy still happens face to face.

Keep ReadingShow less