Reading the news got harder to trust
Not because outlets stopped reporting, but because the same set of facts now arrives shaped five different ways, and the shaping is the part nobody shows you. NeutralEye exists to make that shaping visible, with the evidence attached.
What it commits to
Show the evidence
Every result includes the exact language, sourcing patterns, and framing choices that shaped it. Nothing comes back as a verdict without the reasoning attached. You should be able to open the article and check every claim it makes.
Separate confidence from truth
High confidence means the signals were consistent, not that the article was dishonest, or that anyone is certain about a political judgment. Confidence describes pattern strength. What you do with that pattern is still your call.
Keep the reader in control
It is built to be a prompt, not a verdict. It surfaces what it found and suggests what to read next. The conclusion belongs to you, and that is exactly how it should be.
What it is not
It analyzes how stories are framed, not whether individual claims are true. Checking what a story emphasises and checking whether it is accurate are different disciplines, and this does one of them.
It does not score outlets or keep a standing list of them. Every result is specific to the text submitted, and the same outlet can read very differently across two articles.
The analysis is a starting point, not a final word. It surfaces patterns and suggests context. Deciding what to believe, and what to read next, stays with you.
Who is behind it
One person. That is worth stating plainly, because it sets what you should expect: direct answers, fast changes, and no support queue. It also means the method is written down rather than held in a team’s heads, which is why the analysis runs twice and reports where the two passes disagree.
Try it on an article you are already reading
The judgment is easier to make on something you know well enough to argue with.