USA TODAY
Disclaimer: USA Today has partnered with AllSides and other bridging organizations, such as America Talks, to promote and support conversation events in which people on the left and right come together to bridge divides. This is work AllSides applauds and is a part of. This media bias rating page serves purely as an analysis of the bias of USA Today's news reporting; AllSides' bias analysis is independent, and partnerships with USA Today did not impact news bias analysis.
USA Today has published articles about AllSides' work, including:
USA Today has also published op-eds written by AllSides staff, including:
- Here's how technology can help reduce political polarization (Jan. 2020, CEO John Gable and Head Editor Henry A. Brechter)
- Political incivility is at crisis point in America. Here's how we can fix it (Nov. 2020, Brechter and COO Stephanie Bond).
- What Bruce Springsteen's Super Bowl ad gets right about reuniting Americans in 'the middle (Feb. 2021, Brechter)
Shortages of women, minorities and conservatives are shaping digital content in ways you can't see.
We’ve learned a lot this month about how Facebook picks its trending topics: A team of curators monitors lists of stories organized by an algorithm, boosting, banning and remixing headlines in real time. Those curators may or may not suppress conservative news, something that’s sparked questions about how the social network shapes the content users see.
Facebook is, of course, free to decide what to publish, but a public conversation about its methods is still a good thing, especially if that discussion focuses on more than political leanings.
Anyone troubled by the notion of bias at Facebook, including the conservative leaders who met with CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday, should also be upset by its lack of diversity and the homogeneous workforces of many tech companies. These cornerstones of the social web play significant roles in determining what is and isn’t news. If the default worker is white, male, straight and liberal, that increases the risk that journalism’s future will repeat the mistakes of its past.