No news is unbiased but knowing this makes a difference

In a world shaken up by political polarisation – are humans any good at detecting bias?

In 2003, the United States and its allies invaded Iraq, backed by claims that the country possessed weapons of mass destruction.

None were ever found.

In the years that followed, multiple investigations revealed that biased media reporting and fearmongering helped build public support for  a war where hundreds of thousands of people died.

As Australians prepare to vote in the 2025 federal election, this cautionary tale about the dangerous influence bias can have on our decisions is particularly timely.

Research conducted by economist Evan Calford from the Australian National University (ANU) and Anjuit Chakaraborty from the University of California suggests we may be better at detecting bias than previously thought – but only if we’re given a heads-up.   

“Our study shows that, surprisingly, most people are capable of unravelling bias when they know they’re looking at biased information,” Calford says.

“Previous research shows that humans are generally bad at updating their beliefs in the face of bias. But the key difference between those studies and ours is that they did not explicitly inform the subjects that they were receiving biased information.”

To understand bias, Calford and Chakraborty designed an economic experiment  where participants had to make an educated guess despite only having some of the information they needed.

“When bias was made clear, they used mental shortcuts to make accurate guesses, which is what people do in real life. If you watch Fox News and you know they lean right, the average person will interpret the information by adjusting what they see to the left of the scale.

“You might not know exactly how much you should adjust but knowing the direction — left or right — is the key to obtaining a less biased viewpoint.”

Seeing through spin

Bias in the content we consume can be subtle, even a single, well-chosen word can gently nudge a reader toward a certain conclusion.

Sometimes, it can even be self-inflicted – psychologists use the term ‘confirmation bias’ to describe our inclination to seek information that confirms our existing beliefs.

But whether we lean into bias or try to avoid it, Calford says society needs more “reliable” information about the slant of news sources.

“Even if someone decides to continue relying on the same news channel repeatedly, they’d probably have a more accurate view of reality if they knew more about that outlet’s bias,” he says.

“This would also reduce some of the negative effects of echo chambers – such as in social media spaces where people mostly hear views they already agree with, often without realising they’re inside one. If they can become aware, many would try to update their viewpoints.”

So how could we make bias easier to detect?

Calford argues a news bias index could help.

“Imagine a numerical rating system that scores news outlets from zero to 100, where 50 is neutral, zero leans entirely to one side of the political spectrum, and 100 to the other,” he says.

“It could be based on how often an outlet presents information in a way that’s favourable to a specific political party – something feasible to calculate.”

“Of course, the obvious concern is who builds the index—and whether that process is itself biased. But even with imperfections, I think it would be better than nothing.”

Existing tools have taken steps in this direction. Online sites including AllSides and Ad Fontes Media categorise US media outlets along ideological axes.  

Can bias shape votes?

With Australians heading to the polls in May, the risk of election interference is ever-present. 

Disinformation, misinformation and foreign interference are some of the  political information can be manipulated.

The threat of bias is one we can’t ignore.

“Even if the opinion polls are designed scientifically, the sponsoring or conducting organisation can selectively release only those results that are favourable to their candidate or party,” Calford says.

“Grass-root supporters, financial investors, donors, or polling organisations, who are interested in predicting the outcomes of large elections, can receive very different snapshots of the reality based on which opinion polls they observe.”

“If people want to be unbiased, we need to give them the right information to do it.”

Past research shows biased reporting of poll results can indeed influence voting behaviour.

To counter this, Calford advocates for media literacy education that equips future generations with the skills to unearth hidden bias.

“If you’re well-versed at spotting bias, you’ll pick up on phrases and cues that often signal left- or right-wing leanings. This awareness can help people adjust for it,” he says.

Access to diverse, publicly funded news also matters.

“Putting critical election and political information behind paywalls is generally not a good thing,” Calford says.

“Public broadcasters like the ABC are crucial to ensuring that a range of perspectives are readily available to the public.

“Our study is a first step along the way to understand how bias works, but we hope it can lay the groundwork for future research.

“If people want to be unbiased, we need to give them the right information to do it.”