Sign in

Saves your history across devices. The tools work without an account either way.

Forgot your password?

How a report is produced

Every report follows the same sequence, and the order matters: filing times are established before absences are judged, claims are fixed before outlets are compared, and nothing reaches you that did not survive being run twice.

The sequence

You send a link to the story, and the coverage you want read if you already have it. The report comes back within two business days. It is delivered as a service, so there is no account to create and nothing to learn.

Before any of the below, every article’s first-published and last-updated times are recorded. That is what separates an outlet that chose not to report something from one that had stopped updating before the fact existed, and it runs first, so an absence with a scheduling explanation never reaches the comparison at all.

The articles

  • CNBC Investing Club
  • The Motley Fool
  • Quartz
  • AeroTime
  • 24/7 Wall St

Claims extracted

CNBC Investing Cluban adjusted EPS estimate of $2.11

The Motley Foolthe expected figure was $2.13 per share

Merged

Adjusted EPS estimate for the quarter.

Two wordings, two different figures, one claim. The verbatim sentence stays attached to it.

The matrix

  • CNBCDiverges
  • Motley FoolDiverges
  • QuartzNot stated
  • AeroTimeNot stated
  • 24/7 Wall StNot stated

The analysis records the divergence and does not resolve which figure was right.

Quotes checked

Both spans located verbatim in the source articles.

252 of 252 on this run

Two passes

Pass one

Pass two

Present in both, so published.

This is the only one of the report’s five claims where two outlets carried the same fact and disagreed on it; the other four reached the matrix as omissions.

What it deliberately does not do

  • It does not rate outlets

    There is no score and no spectrum. Every finding is specific to one article about one story, and the same outlet reads differently across two stories.

  • It does not check whether claims are true

    This describes how a story was assembled: what was carried, what was left out, and where an outlet's own text disagrees with its summary. Fact-checking is a different discipline.

  • It is not media monitoring

    No mention counts, no sentiment, no volume dashboard. It is a close read of a small number of articles about one story.

The free tools run the same checks

Tone, framing, attribution, source balance and omission are the same five signals in both places. The difference is scale: the tools read one article, and a report reads every outlet that covered the story and sets them against each other.

If you want to see the method before you send anything, the analyzer is free and needs no account.

Bring a story you already know well

The fastest way to judge the output is on coverage you have read closely enough to argue with.