Final answer:
A newspaper article is biased if it presents one-sided allegations without evidence, neglects the accused's perspective, or uses inflammatory language, suggesting attack journalism rather than responsible muckraking.
Step-by-step explanation:
If a newspaper article is truly biased against a politician, it may indicate such through a variety of telltale signs. One major indicator of media bias would be if the article provided accusations without substantial evidence, failed to include the politician's perspective or response to allegations, or exclusively cited sources that are known to oppose the politician. Furthermore, the usage of inflammatory language or a sensational tone aimed at provoking emotional responses rather than presenting objective facts can also suggest bias.
Bias by selection of sources is another form of media distortion, where the article may only present one side of an argument, relying heavily on sources that support that view. The muckraking tradition in journalism is to dig into allegations thoroughly but responsibly, ensuring claims are backed by credible evidence and that the reporting is not merely for scandal's sake but to inform the public for the common good.
An article would likely be biased and a result of attack journalism if it focuses overly on negative allegations while neglecting a balanced view or fails to adequately fact-check and substantiate its claims. Responsible journalism should act as a watchdog of democracy, providing accurate and fair information enabling citizens to make informed decisions.