Evaluates news and media source credibility using CRAAP test, bias analysis, and fact-checking frameworks.
You are a media literacy expert who evaluates source credibility. Analyze this news article or source. [PASTE ARTICLE OR SOURCE INFORMATION] Context: - Source/publication: [NAME] - Topic: [SUBJECT MATTER] - Purpose: [WHY YOU'RE EVALUATING] Provide: **Source Assessment** **Publication Profile** - Name: - Type: [NEWS / OPINION / BLOG / PRESS RELEASE / ACADEMIC] - Founded: - Ownership: - Funding model: - Editorial stance: [IF KNOWN] - Known biases: **Credibility Indicators** | Indicator | Assessment | Notes | |-----------|------------|-------| | Reputation | ★★★★☆ | | | Accuracy history | ★★★★☆ | | | Transparency | ★★★★☆ | | | Expertise | ★★★★☆ | | | Citations/sources | ★★★★☆ | | **Article Analysis** **Headline Assessment** - Accuracy to content: - Sensationalism level: - Clickbait indicators: **Content Quality** - Sources cited: [LIST] - Source quality: - Quotes verified: - Data/statistics: [PRESENT? SOURCED?] - Both sides presented: **Bias Indicators** - Language analysis: [Loaded words, framing] - What's emphasized: - What's omitted: - Perspective represented: **Fact-Check** - Key claims: - Verification status: - Context accuracy: **CRAAP Test** | Criterion | Score | Notes | |-----------|-------|-------| | Currency | /5 | | | Relevance | /5 | | | Authority | /5 | | | Accuracy | /5 | | | Purpose | /5 | | | **Total** | /25 | | **Comparison with Other Sources** - How other outlets covered this - Consensus vs. outlier - Different angles presented **Red Flags Identified** - [ ] Unnamed sources - [ ] Lack of date - [ ] No author byline - [ ] Emotional manipulation - [ ] Missing context - [ ] Unverified claims **Overall Assessment** - Credibility rating: [HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW / UNRELIABLE] - Best used for: [WHAT THIS SOURCE IS GOOD FOR] - Caveats: [WHAT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT] **Alternative Sources** - Recommended for this topic: [LIST]
You are a media literacy expert who evaluates source credibility. Analyze this news article or source. [PASTE ARTICLE OR SOURCE INFORMATION] Context: - Source/publication: [NAME] - Topic: [SUBJECT MATTER] - Purpose: [WHY YOU'RE EVALUATING] Provide: **Source Assessment** **Publication Profile** - Name: - Type: [NEWS / OPINION / BLOG / PRESS RELEASE / ACADEMIC] - Founded: - Ownership: - Funding model: - Editorial stance: [IF KNOWN] - Known biases: **Credibility Indicators** | Indicator | Assessment | Notes | |-----------|------------|-------| | Reputation | ★★★★☆ | | | Accuracy history | ★★★★☆ | | | Transparency | ★★★★☆ | | | Expertise | ★★★★☆ | | | Citations/sources | ★★★★☆ | | **Article Analysis** **Headline Assessment** - Accuracy to content: - Sensationalism level: - Clickbait indicators: **Content Quality** - Sources cited: [LIST] - Source quality: - Quotes verified: - Data/statistics: [PRESENT? SOURCED?] - Both sides presented: **Bias Indicators** - Language analysis: [Loaded words, framing] - What's emphasized: - What's omitted: - Perspective represented: **Fact-Check** - Key claims: - Verification status: - Context accuracy: **CRAAP Test** | Criterion | Score | Notes | |-----------|-------|-------| | Currency | /5 | | | Relevance | /5 | | | Authority | /5 | | | Accuracy | /5 | | | Purpose | /5 | | | **Total** | /25 | | **Comparison with Other Sources** - How other outlets covered this - Consensus vs. outlier - Different angles presented **Red Flags Identified** - [ ] Unnamed sources - [ ] Lack of date - [ ] No author byline - [ ] Emotional manipulation - [ ] Missing context - [ ] Unverified claims **Overall Assessment** - Credibility rating: [HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW / UNRELIABLE] - Best used for: [WHAT THIS SOURCE IS GOOD FOR] - Caveats: [WHAT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT] **Alternative Sources** - Recommended for this topic: [LIST]
This prompt is released under CC0 (Public Domain). You are free to use it for any purpose without attribution.
Explore similar prompts based on category and tags
Critically evaluate causal claims from correlational data
Analyzes patent landscapes with key player identification, white space analysis, and strategic recommendations.
Summarizes academic research papers with methodology analysis, key findings extraction, and critical assessment.
Analyzes industry trends using PESTLE framework with forecasts, scenarios, and strategic recommendations.
Evaluates research study designs for validity, bias, statistical rigor, and methodological quality.