In episode 44 of Bias Breakdown, we examine how media outlets spun President Trump’s meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping into a competition rather than straightforward diplomatic coverage. Left-leaning outlets framed Xi as having the advantage, while right-leaning media praised Trump’s performance as a major success. The episode breaks down how these contrasting narratives reveal a broader pattern of media spin — mixing sensationalism, slant, and word choice bias — that extends beyond this meeting and into coverage of other world leader summits.

In episode 43 of Bias Breakdown, we dive into the NYC mayoral race to examine how media coverage can differ dramatically depending on political leanings. From story selection to framing and viewpoint omission, we break down how the same events are reported in contrasting ways — and what that means for how voters perceive the candidates.

In episode 42 of Bias Breakdown, we examine how the media is framing President Trump’s authorization of U.S. military strikes off the coast of Venezuela. We unpack the constitutional and legal arguments, including Trump’s use of Article II powers, the classification of traffickers as “unlawful combatants,” and Congress’s role in approving military action. We also explore how news outlets across the political spectrum cover the story — which perspectives are highlighted and which are omitted — and examine patterns of viewpoint and source attribution omission, showing how these choices shape public perception of the strikes’ legality and justification.

In episode 41 of Bias Breakdown, we examine how media silence shapes public understanding. This week, we look at resurfaced 2022 text messages from Democratic Virginia AG candidate Jay Jones that show him making violent remarks about a political opponent and his family. Right-leaning outlets amplified the story, while many left-leaning networks ignored it, highlighting bias by omission. We also draw parallels to past political scandals and other major stories where the same bias by omission shaped public awareness.

In episode 40 of Bias Breakdown, we explore how coverage of the government shutdown has focused on health care for immigrants and evolved into two partisan narratives. Left-leaning outlets emphasize that undocumented immigrants remain ineligible for Medicaid, while right-leaning outlets highlight efforts to expand or fund care for those here illegally. Both rely on selective facts about a proposal to repeal Medicaid reimbursement limits. The episode examines how slant and spin shape public understanding through partial truths.

In episode 39 of Bias Breakdown, we dive into how partisan media shapes public perception of ICE operations. Using the recent arrest of a Des Moines school superintendent as a case study, we explore how Fox and CBS reported the facts with different framing—one highlighting legal violations, the other emphasizing community support — leading audiences to vastly different conclusions. We also examine bias by omission, showing how networks selectively cover stories that fit their narratives while ignoring others. Tune in to understand how word choice, spin, and selective coverage influence the way Americans see immigration enforcement.

In episode 38 of Bias Breakdown, we dive into the suspension and return of Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show, examining how media outlets pushed competing narratives that ignored the facts. From claims about plummeted ratings to alleged FCC pressure, we break down how speculation, flawed logic, and unsubstantiated reporting shaped the story—and what the facts actually show.

In episode 37 of Bias Breakdown, we examine the assassination of Charlie Kirk and the polarized media coverage that followed. From left-leaning outlets labeling him “controversial” and “divisive” to right-leaning commentators using emotionally charged rhetoric, this episode breaks down how word choice, framing, and opinion-as-fact reporting shape public perception. We also explore polling data showing widening partisan divides on key issues — revealing how media divisions mirror America’s deepening political polarization.

In episode 36 of Bias Breakdown, we unpack the recent Trump death hoax and how it exposed contrasting media narratives. Left-leaning outlets fueled speculation about the president’s health, while right-leaning outlets largely deflected, criticizing what they saw as liberal hypocrisy over Biden's health. The episode explores how these framing choices, whether through speculation or omission, shape public perception and highlight the influence of media bias on reporting.

In episode 35 of Bias Breakdown, we explore how media coverage of the Minneapolis Catholic school shooting split along partisan lines. Left-leaning outlets focused on gun laws, while right-leaning networks emphasized mental health and the shooter’s identity. We examine examples of media framing, bias by omission, and flawed logic, and look at polling showing Americans are nearly evenly divided on the causes of school shootings.

In Episode 34 of Bias Breakdown, we dive into how media bias shapes coverage of Governor Gavin Newsom’s new Trump-style social media strategy. From one-sided cable news panels that exclude opposing viewpoints to networks cherry-picking voices like Charlamagne tha God, Steve Bannon, and Joe Scarborough when convenient, we break down the tactics that steer public perception.

In episode 33 of Bias Breakdown, we examine how the Smithsonian review is covered through a partisan lens. Both left- and right-leaning outlets frame the story with negativity—either casting President Trump as authoritarian or portraying the Smithsonian as an institution steeped in bias. We break down how this illustrates negativity bias in the media, where narratives emphasize criticism over context, shaping audience perceptions before the facts are fully presented.

In episode 32 of Bias Breakdown, we dive into how media slant shapes the coverage of crime statistics in Washington, D.C., following President Trump’s move to federalize the city’s police force. We unpack how different outlets highlight conflicting data to fit political narratives, and explore why understanding the full picture behind the numbers is key to spotting bias and staying informed.

In episode 31 of Bias Breakdown, we analyze how major media outlets are covering Texas’ latest redistricting fight — and where bias shows up in the headlines and framing. From The New York Times to The New York Post, we break down examples of viewpoint omission, subjective language, and sensationalism that shape how the story is told. This episode helps you spot the difference between information and influence.

In episode 30 of Bias Breakdown, we explore how media outlets on both sides of the aisle covered—or ignored—Tulsi Gabbard’s release of declassified Obama-era intelligence reports. The episode highlights how left- and right-leaning networks often offer only one perspective, omitting alternative viewpoints and shaping contrasting narratives. It also reveals how bias by omission influences which stories receive national attention. Ultimately, the episode uncovers a deeper battle over who controls the news cycle and the narrative, shaping what Americans see and hear.

 In episode 29 of Bias Breakdown, the Epstein files are creating a divide within right-leaning media over how—or whether—to cover the story. Two of the top conservative networks are at odds, reflecting a broader split within the Republican Party over the Trump administration’s handling of the case. Tune in as we explore the differences, the divide, and the reasons behind the silence—while the nation waits for answers in this high-profile investigation.

He’s the progressive candidate shaking up New York City politics — and he’s getting attention from both sides of the aisle. Right-leaning outlets are quick to sound the alarm over Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral bid. But it’s the split inside left-leaning media — led by The New York Times — that’s catching many by surprise. In Episode 28 of Bias Breakdown, we analyze how Mamdani’s rise is revealing a fracture in left-leaning narratives — and what it says about the media’s role in shaping political momentum.

In Episode 27 of Bias Breakdown, media coverage of the interest rate debate reveals a sharp partisan divide. As the Federal Reserve signals it will likely hold rates steady later this month, President Trump continues to push for cuts. Left-leaning outlets blame Trump’s tariff policies, while right-leaning networks fault Fed Chair Jerome Powell — choosing sides in a debate where the economic data is shared, but the narrative is not.

In Episode 26 of Bias Breakdown, we examine how news outlets framed the U.S. airstrikes on Iran through a political lens. As conflicting intelligence reports emerged, media coverage split along partisan lines — amplifying whichever assessment aligned with their stance on the strikes. We break down the competing narratives, explore public opinion polling, and highlight what the coverage reveals about media bias in reporting high-stakes global events.

In episode 25 of Bias Breakdown, we unpack how the media is framing the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a ban on transgender medical treatments for minors. From the language used in headlines to the studies each side highlights, the coverage reveals a clear partisan split. We break down the selective word choice and bias shaping the narrative — and take a closer look at where most Americans really stand on the issue.