Methodology
Understanding how we assess media bias and press freedom
Free Press Score (0-100)
Our Free Press Score is computed deterministically — the same inputs always yield the same number, no AI in the scoring step. It aggregates three key dimensions of media quality and independence. The weights are 35% fact-check accuracy, 35% editorial independence and 30% transparency — published here from the same constants the calculation uses, so this page cannot drift from the code again (an earlier version said "weighted equally" while the code computed 35/35/30).
Fact-Check Accuracy (35%)
Measures the outlet's track record of factual reporting based on independent fact-checking organizations including PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, and Snopes. We analyze the percentage of stories that contain verifiable facts, the rate of corrections issued, and ratings from third-party fact-checkers.
Editorial Independence (35%)
Assesses the degree of separation between ownership, advertisers, and editorial decisions. We examine ownership structure, funding sources, documented instances of editorial interference, and the presence of independent editorial boards. State-controlled media receives lower scores.
Transparency (30%)
Evaluates how openly the outlet discloses its ownership, funding, conflicts of interest, and editorial processes. We look for clear disclosure of sponsored content, accessibility of corrections and retractions, and transparency about methodology and sources.
Bias Score (-2 to +2)
Our bias assessment measures the political lean of editorial content and news coverage as Left, Center or Right — the same three-way scale as the Daily News app, so an outlet reads the same across both. This is not a judgment of quality, but rather an assessment of ideological positioning.
Left-0.5 to 0.5
Center≥ 0.5
Right
Scores run -2 to +2 internally for sorting; outlets are grouped into these three bands for display.
Assessment Methodology
- •Content Analysis: We analyze word choice, story selection, source usage, and framing across hundreds of articles
- •Source Attribution: Examination of which sources are quoted and how frequently different perspectives are presented
- •Editorial Positioning: Review of opinion pieces, editorial board positions, and public statements
- •Third-Party Assessments: We incorporate ratings from AllSides, Media Bias/Fact Check, and academic media studies
Accountability Metrics
We track concrete actions that demonstrate accountability and transparency, including:
Retractions & Corrections
Documented instances where the outlet acknowledged and corrected errors in their reporting
Legal Cases
Litigation is scored by disposition, never by filing count. A case the outlet lost carries the full penalty; a settlement carries a small one and is not treated as an admission; dismissed and still-pending cases cost nothing, because a filing is an accusation anyone with a filing fee can make. Without this rule, an outlet SLAPP-sued for accurate reporting would score worse than one nobody bothered to sue.
Controversies & Scandals
Major incidents involving journalistic ethics, editorial interference, or public trust
Data Sources
Honesty about how this is actually built: outlet profiles are researched by AI language models (a cascade across several providers), supplemented by web search snippets and page scraping. An earlier version of this page listed AllSides, Media Bias/Fact Check, Reporters Without Borders, Freedom House, PolitiFact and FactCheck.org as our sources — the pipeline never consulted any of them, and claiming borrowed authority is exactly the failure a media accountability site exists to call out.
AI research models
Groq, xAI, OpenAI, Anthropic, Perplexity, OpenRouter, Gemini — first to answer wins
Web search snippets
SerpAPI results passed to the model as context
Page scraping
ScrapingBee, for supplementary site data
Manual curation
Admin review and edits of individual profiles
AI-researched claims can be wrong or stale, and individual facts are not yet linked to citations. Treat specific claims (ownership, lawsuits, funding) as leads to verify against primary sources, not as settled fact. Per-claim source links are the roadmap's top item.
Important Disclaimer
Our ratings represent an aggregation of available data and third-party assessments. Media bias analysis is inherently subjective, and reasonable people may disagree with specific ratings. We encourage users to read from multiple sources across the political spectrum and to consult original sources when possible. Our goal is to promote media literacy and informed news consumption, not to serve as the sole arbiter of media quality.