Transparency News
Automated assessment. Scores measure selected wording patterns in the outlet's own words. They do not assess factual accuracy, completeness, or which stories an outlet covers. What the score measures

Washington Examiner

The arithmetic for one report

Vance-linked group launches 2028 effort to win back ground for conservatives

Washington Examiner · · full text read

89Few flagged expressions

What was read

428 words in the outlet's own voice, plus 11 in the headline. 26% of the text is in quotes. 8 attribution markers (such as "said" or "according to") found.

Scare quotes (a phrase of one to three words in quotation marks with no speaker in the same sentence): purely creedal nation, purely an idea,. Since method 3.1.0 their words count as the outlet's own.

Words found

Layer scores

Rates are counted points per 1,000 words of the story's own text. For a story longer than 200 words, the rate used is the average of the whole-story rate and the rate in its densest 200-word stretch, so neutral filler cannot dilute a loaded passage away. Score = 100 × (loaded end − rate used) ÷ loaded end, kept between 0 and 100. Headline words count only in the headline layer.

LayerPointsWordsWhole-story rateDensest 200 wordsRate usedScaleScore
Word choice04280.00.0 (words 1 to 200)0.00 to 40100
Temperature14282.35.0 (words 1 to 200)3.70 to 4091
Flagged attribution phrases24284.710.0 (words 201 to 400)7.30 to 2063
Headline wording0250.0headline only0.00 to 240100

Densest stretch: Temperature, words 1 to 200 of 428, with sweeping; Flagged attribution phrases, words 201 to 400 of 428, with insiders.

Shown, not scored: the headline's rate minus the rate of the story's first 80 words is 0.0 points per 1,000 words.

Overall

Weighted geometric mean of the layers that are established, with 10 added to each layer first and taken away at the end: (Word choice 100 + 10)0.4 × (Temperature 91 + 10)0.3 × (Flagged attribution phrases 63 + 10)0.2 × (Headline wording 100 + 10)0.1 − 10 = 89. Adding 10 means one layer at 0 lowers the total steeply without collapsing it. A weak layer pulls the total down.

Lowered the score most: Flagged attribution phrases.

Name-swap test: with party, politician and institution names swapped, this report's score moves by 0.0 points.

What a reader could check

People named as sources0
Unnamed sources1 (100% of all sources found)
Links to primary records (government, court, filings, PDFs)0
Documents cited in the text (a report, bill, ruling, filing)0
Checkable specifics (numbers and dates)5
Data shown (a table or chart)no
Correction or clarification notedno

What a reader could check, counted by published patterns. Shown beside the score, never part of it. How each count works

Checked against the official record

No vote count or bill number found in the text read.

Record of this measurement

Method 3.1.0, word-list fingerprint 807a17189402a416, read by text extractor version 4. Fingerprint of the text read: 135fac4d3be004d5. Internet Archive copy nearest the time it was read. The text read was not kept (read before method 3.1.0, or from the feed only), so a later rule change can be applied only while the report is still in the outlet's feed.

Dispute this result · Report a missed word