"In review, The American Spectator reports news with a conservative bias. There is the moderate use of emotionally loaded language such as this: The Death of the Democratic Party. This opinion piece, which is not labeled as such, contains zero sourcing. As an online publication, there should be hyperlinks provided to support claims. In another article from their blog Immigration: Trump’s on the Right Track, there is again a complete lack of sourcing. We found some that were appropriately linked to credible media outlets by reviewing dozens of articles, but not many. Story selection always favors the right and denigrates the left. Editorially, the American Spectator favors former President Donald Trump, such as this: The Reelection of Donald Trump. When it comes to the science of climate change, they do not align with the consensus of science, which they make clear in this article."
yeah if it wasn’t obvious from the first paragraph, this is the most blatant load of BS i’ve read in a while
we must reckon with the utter amorality of the Democratic Party —which is not to assert that there are no amoral individuals in the Republican Party
“oh we’re impartial we swear! we acknowledge there might be 1 or 2 on our side”
American Spectator? Really?
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-spectator/
"In review, The American Spectator reports news with a conservative bias. There is the moderate use of emotionally loaded language such as this: The Death of the Democratic Party. This opinion piece, which is not labeled as such, contains zero sourcing. As an online publication, there should be hyperlinks provided to support claims. In another article from their blog Immigration: Trump’s on the Right Track, there is again a complete lack of sourcing. We found some that were appropriately linked to credible media outlets by reviewing dozens of articles, but not many. Story selection always favors the right and denigrates the left. Editorially, the American Spectator favors former President Donald Trump, such as this: The Reelection of Donald Trump. When it comes to the science of climate change, they do not align with the consensus of science, which they make clear in this article."
yeah if it wasn’t obvious from the first paragraph, this is the most blatant load of BS i’ve read in a while
“oh we’re impartial we swear! we acknowledge there might be 1 or 2 on our side”