Coverage of violence in Nigeria has exposed sharp partisan divides in media sourcing and framing. Outlets labeled by news bias monitors as having a left lean, such as CNN, The Associated Press and The Washington Post, cited or quoted the U.S.-based Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) project, which reported only a few hundred Christians killed for their faith since 2020 — data suggesting most violence is indiscriminate. Right-leaning outlets, like Fox News, the New York Post and The Federalist, relied on Christian and Nigerian-based groups such as Open Doors and Intersociety, which reported thousands of targeted Christian deaths.
Download the Straight Arrow app today to get the stories that matter free from manipulation, bias or agenda.™
Point phone camera here
Julie Mastrine, Director of Media Bias Ratings at AllSides, joins Bias Breakdown for an in-depth analysis of just how these newsroom decisions represent bias in the American news landscape. You’ll learn more about how these decisions qualify as “slant” and “omission.”
It is a similar trend in other conflicts, from Gaza to Ukraine, where competing death tolls are often filtered through partisan lenses.
“Instead of avoiding or ignoring conflicting data or sources they disagree with, a journalist’s role is to overcome their own bias, be honest about the differences, and present both sides to the reader,” Mastrine said.
