While media outlets acclimate to the news cycle revolving around President Donald Trump for a second term, another figure has demanded almost as much attention: Elon Musk. 

RELATED: The Latest on Federal Cuts and Firings

Between March 19-21, AllSides conducted a Types of Media Bias analysis on 10 different outlets – two from each of our five bias rating categories – to examine how they’re covering Musk. There were notable differences in how positively or negatively he was framed, as well as where digital news outlets placed coverage of him on their websites. 

Left and Lean Left Outlets

The Guardian (Left bias) wrote, “Musk echoes rightwing conspiracy theories to defend social security cuts.” This headline slants the narrative around Musk by asserting that he’s ‘echoing’ a conspiracy theory, which reflects the outlet’s own interpretation of Musk’s comments. As such, The Guardian falls into a classic category of media bias known as opinion stated as fact, where their personal assessments of Musk’s defence as clearly echoing some conspiracies are presented as factual. 

HuffPost (Left bias) wrote, “Top Secret War Plans Gift-Wrapped For Musk.” This headline spins a narrative that secret government plans are being presented to Musk as a ‘gift’, framing the government as subservient to Musk. The framing of ‘top secret’ is also an unsubstantiated claim, as HuffPost did not provide evidence to support the assertion that these alleged ‘war plans’ were top-secret. It is worth noting that the report on Musk being set to view war plans has been denied by Trump. 

ABC News Online (Lean Left bias) wrote “Pentagon changed Musk visit after report about him viewing China war plans: Officials.” This headline has flawed logic, as it somewhat corroborates the report that Musk was set to view China war plans, which has been denied by Trump. 

AP News (Left bias) wrote “Trump says war plans should not be shared with Elon Musk because of his business interests.” AP News provides a quote from Trump to substantiate its claim that Musk was removed from discussions due to ‘business interests’, and frames the story between Trump and Musk. This contrasts with ABC News Online, which framed the story based on the assumption that the report of Musk viewing China war plans was true. As such, AP News displayed less clear bias than the other sources on the Left. 

Center Outlets

BBC News (Center bias) wrote “Tesla's challenges run deeper than 'toxic' controversy around Elon Musk.” While it did not address Musk’s role in government, BBC framed Musk in a negative light by presenting the ‘toxic’ controversy as the main proponent behind Tesla’s challenges. This is a form of media bias known as slant, as BBC detailed only one side of the narrative behind ‘Tesla’s challenges’. 

Reuters (Center bias) wrote, “US judge finds Musk's USAID cuts likely unconstitutional.” Data collection revealed that Reuters only published Musk-focused stories twice during the select timeframe, with the above headline illustrating what is known as bias by story choice. Reuters reported on Musk far less than outlets on the Left, and when it did, it tended to frame his government involvement as suspicious or ‘unconstitutional.’

Right and Lean Right Outlets

Washington Examiner (Lean Right bias) wrote, “Trump won't show Elon Musk China plans due to conflict of interest.” This framing is non-specific about the nature of the ‘conflict of interest’ that led Trump to exclude Musk from the ‘China plans’; this type of bias is known as bias by omission. 

The New York Post (Lean Right bias) wrote, “Elon Musk shocked over nationwide Tesla vandalism as DOGE uncovers government waste: 'Some kind of mental illness'.” This headline slants the narrative in favor of Musk, while also framing his detractors as having ‘some kind of mental illness’ — an example of mud slinging.

Breitbart (Right bias) wrote, “Fear Campaign Escalates: Trump Haters Launch 'DOGEQUEST' Site Targeting TESLA Owners.” While not specifically discussing Musk’s role in government, Breitbart did report on the recent Tesla vandalism events happening across the country, framing it as a ‘fear campaign.’ This slanted narrative also frames those in alliance with the ‘fear campaign’ as ‘Trump Haters’, a clear example of mud slinging. 

FOX News Digital (Right bias) wrote, “Tim Walz mocks Tesla's stock and gets destroyed by Elon Musk's response.” Here, FOX frames Walz negatively by implying Musk’s response to Walz’s ‘mocking’ behavior, ‘destroyed’ him. This is an example of both spin and sensationalism, as FOX chooses to focus on this ‘battle’ using hyperbolic language.

Comparisons Between Outlets

On Musk’s character: The Guardian vs New York Post

Both The Guardian (Left bias) and New York Post (Lean Right bias) reported on stories about Musk that centered on interpreting his character. The Guardian framed Musk as someone prone to ‘echoing rightwing conspiracy theories’, whereas the New York Post portrayed Musk as a victim of ‘nationwide Tesla vandalism’ and framed Musk’s detractors as having ‘some kind of mental illness.’ Despite reaching different conclusions about Musk’s character, both outlets employed slant as a main method to shift the narrative of their piece to a specific political bias. 

On China War Plans Report: HuffPost vs Washington Examiner

HuffPost (Left bias) framed the story as though the government was ‘gifting’ Musk secret war plans on a silver platter; portraying the government as obedient or corrupt towards Musk. The article only mentioned Trump’s denial of the report, shifting the narrative to focus on being anti-Musk; a clear example of bias by omission.

In contrast, the Washington Examiner (Lean Right bias) chose to focus on Trump’s refutation of said report rather than the report itself. As such, the Washington Examiner also used bias by omission, in the opposite direction to avoid potential conversations over the possibility of Musk being briefed on war plans in the first place. 

How the Outlets Differ as A Whole

Typically, outlets on the Right reported on Musk favorably, often siding with him or putting a positive spin on his character and actions in government. Additionally, throughout the data collection process, sources with a Lean Right and Right bias typically placed stories about Musk much lower on the homepage than sources on the Left did — a form of bias by placement. Notably, Breitbart (Right bias) and FOX News Digital (Right bias) lacked headlines on the topic of Musk being briefed on war plans by the Pentagon, illustrating bias by story choice. 

Outlets rated Center, Left, and Lean Left, typically reported on Musk more often than sources on the Right, while also placing these stories higher on their respective homepages; bias by placement and story choice. Additionally, these sources were collectively more critical of Musk’s role in government than sources on the Right. However, it is worth noting that The Guardian (Left bias) and HuffPost (Left bias) were more prone to stating opinions as fact and sensationalizing their headlines, using phrases like: ‘conspiracy theories’ and ‘gift-wrapped’.

Written by intern Emanuel Macuixtle (Left bias). Contributions by Andrew Weinzierl (Lean Left) with data collection. 

Reviewed by Henry A. Brechter, Editor-in-chief (Center) and Olivia Geno, News and Bias Assistant (Lean Right).