To determine which article is more biased regarding the Kahton Anderson case, one must evaluate the balance and representation of sources, the objectivity of language, and whether the coverage tends towards sensationalism or informative reporting.
When determining which of the two articles about the Kahton Anderson case is more biased, one must look at the representation and balance of sources, the language used, and whether the article provides a multifaceted view of the case or leans towards a particular narrative. Bias by a selection of sources occurs when an article features a disproportionate number of sources that support a specific viewpoint or uses experts who are known to have a particular political or ideological stance.
Similarly, when journalists claim neutrality and objectivity, but provide coverage that is either too favorable towards the government or sensational in nature, this can also indicate bias. One must assess whether the article in question has used inflammatory language or has a tendency towards sensationalism, which crosses from informational to sensational coverage, rather than acting as the watchdog of democracy.
In examining Trevor's writing for objectivity, one should look for language that is objective or whether certain words reveal a slant. For example, referring to Kahton in a manner that presumes guilt or innocence or portraying the incident in an emotionally charged way demonstrates the writer's bias.