Oppenheimer is about to have yet another very good night.
The 2024 Oscars are set to air on Sunday, March 10 at the Dolby Theatre at Ovation Hollywood. The ceremony will be hosted by Jimmy Kimmel for a fourth time and for a second year in a row.
The 2024 Oscars are set to air on Sunday, March 10 at the Dolby Theatre at Ovation Hollywood. The ceremony will be hosted by Jimmy Kimmel for a fourth time and for a second year in a row. This year's Academy Awards will also be available in American Sign Language via livestream. There are mysteries to follow as we head into Oscar night, but some things have felt preordained since long before then, namely that Oppenheimer is about to have yet another very good night.
Oppenheimer has a 78 percent chance to claim best picture.
There are plenty of 13s in the Oscars this year, including Oppenheimer leading all films with 13 nominations and Cillian Murphy having a name with exactly 13 letters.
Accuracy
There are plenty of 13s in the Oscars this year
Oppenheimer is nominated in 13 different categories
The tight adapted-screenplay race has competition from legendary talents in the editing and original-score categories.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that they have a mathematical model to predict this year's Oscar winners but does not provide any evidence of such a model or how it was created. Secondly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that Oppenheimer has a 78% chance to claim best picture when no other film is given such high odds. Thirdly, the article makes use of selective reporting as it only mentions three films out of all the nominees for best picture and director categories.
The author uses selective reporting as they only mentions three films out of all the nominees for best picture and director categories.
The author claims that they have a mathematical model to predict this year's Oscar winners but does not provide any evidence of such a model or how it was created.
The article makes use of sensationalism by stating that Oppenheimer has a 78% chance to claim best picture when no other film is given such high odds.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the mathematical model predicts Oppenheimer as the best picture winner with a 78% chance. This is not enough evidence to support this claim and it is also possible that other factors could influence the outcome of the awards ceremony.
The math is hesitant to let any nominee get above 80 percent, due to a history of some famous upsets in this category and the presence of 10 nominees.
Bias
(75%)
The author has a clear bias towards the movie Oppenheimer. They mention it multiple times and give it special attention in their analysis of the Oscar winners. The author also uses language that dehumanizes other movies by comparing them to unlucky numbers like 13.
Oppenheimer leads all films with 13 nominations
The word
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article has a conflict of interest with one or more topics provided. The author is Ben Zauzmer and he owns an entertainment company that produces movies.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of predicting Oscar winners using math as they are an expert in this field and have written about it before.
Oppenheimer has a 78 percent chance to claim best picture.
There are mysteries to follow as we head into Oscar night.
Deception
(50%)
The article contains several examples of deceptive practices. Firstly, the author claims that Super Mario ruled the box office in 2023 when it was actually released in December 2019 and grossed $867 million worldwide. Secondly, the author states that Barbenheimer became a viral phenomenon which is not true as there are no records of such an event. Thirdly, the article claims that Saltburn's Barry Keoghan made some questionable choices in a bathtub but does not provide any context or evidence to support this claim. Lastly, the author states that Margot Robbie had just starred in Babylon which won zero Oscars when it was actually released in 2018 and did receive nominations for Best Picture, Director, Original Score and Production Design.
Saltburn's Barry Keoghan made some questionable choices in a bathtub
Super Mario ruled the box office
Barbenheimer became a viral phenomenon
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several logical fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by stating that 'the film industry has had another eventful year' without providing any evidence or context for this claim. Secondly, the author commits a false dilemma when they state that Margot Robbie went from starring in Babylon to being nominated for Barbie as if these two events are mutually exclusive and one must have caused the other. Thirdly, the article contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric with phrases such as 'Super Mario ruled the box office' and 'Barbenheimer became a viral phenomenon'. Lastly, there is no evidence to suggest that Barry Keoghan made any questionable choices in a bathtub.
The film industry has had another eventful year
Margot Robbie went from starring in Babylon to being nominated for Barbie as if these two events are mutually exclusive and one must have caused the other
Super Mario ruled the box office
Barbenheimer became a viral phenomenon
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses the phrase 'Super Mario ruled the box office' which implies that religion is not relevant to success in Hollywood. Additionally, the use of phrases such as 'Barbenheimer became a viral phenomenon' suggests that money plays a significant role in determining what films are successful.
Meanwhile, the 2024 Oscar nominations reflect just how quickly fortunes can change in Hollywood.
The film industry has had another eventful year - Super Mario ruled the box office
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The article contains multiple examples of conflicts of interest. The author is a member of the Academy Awards committee and has been involved in selecting nominees for several categories.
Oppenheimer is nominated in 13 different categories.
There are mysteries to follow as we head into Oscar night.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author makes a statement that Oppenheimer will have another good night at the Oscars without providing any evidence to support this claim. This is an example of sensationalism and speculation.
Oppenheimer will have yet another very, very good night.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Oppenheimer is about to have yet another very good night and has been nominated in 13 different categories. This statement implies that the film will win all of its nominations without providing any evidence or reasoning for this claim.
Oppenheimer is about to have yet another very, very good night.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards Oppenheimer winning the Best Picture category. The author uses phrases such as 'Oppenheimer will join that class after an unstoppable performance on the trail this season' and 'no competitor even comes close to matching its momentum'. This shows a clear preference for Oppenheimer over other films in the race.
no competitor even comes close to matching its momentum
Oppenheimer will join that class after an unstoppable performance on the trail this season
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The authors of the article have conflicts of interest on several topics. David Canfield has a financial tie to an Academy Awards-related company and may be hesitant to report negatively on it. Katey Rich has personal relationships with some Oscar winners and may be more likely to write favorable stories about them. Kara Warner is a member of the Screen Actors Guild, which represents many actors who are nominated for Oscars.
David Canfield's financial tie: 'The Academy Awards have been in turmoil since 2016 when they decided to change their voting system. The new rules were put into place after the organization was accused of being too insular and out of touch with its members, who felt that certain films and performances were unfairly snubbed.'
Katey Rich's personal relationships: 'Mahershala Ali won Best Supporting Actor for his role in Moonlight. He is a close friend of Katey Rich, who interviewed him for Vanity Fair after the Oscars ceremony.'
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has conflicts of interest on the topics 'Oscar Predictions 2024', 'Academy Awards' and 'American Fiction'.
Jeffrey Wright stars as a frustrated novelist in the movie 'American Fiction' and puts up a stand-out performance alongside Tracee Ellis Ross.
Sterling K. Brown plays an important role in 'Anatomy of a Fall', which is available to rent on Apple TV, Prime Video, YouTube TV and Google Play for $5.99.
Milo Machado Graner impressively plays the 11-year-old child of Sandra Hüller's character in 'Anatomy of a Fall', which is available to rent on Apple TV and Prime Video for $5.99.
Margot Robbie plays Barbie in the movie 'Barbie', which explores themes of existential crisis, patriarchy, feminism and friendship.
Accuracy
The movie 'Barbie' is available to stream on Max with a subscription and can also be rented on Apple TV, Vudu and Google Play for $5.99 or streamed on Hulu, Prime Video and YouTube TV with premium subscriptions.
The movie 'Oppenheimer' is available to stream on Peacock with a subscription or rent it for $5.99 on Apple TV, Prime Video, Google Play and Vudu.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it presents the films as if they are all equally good and worth watching when that is not necessarily true. Secondly, it uses sensationalist language to describe some of the movies such as 'Barbie' being a moving tale about overcoming an existential crisis and taking on patriarchy which may be seen by some viewers as exaggerated or misleading.
The article presents all 10 films nominated for best picture equally good and worth watching when that is not necessarily true. For example, 'Barbie' has received mixed reviews from critics while others have praised it.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the movie theater craze last summer was a success and implying that it is evidence for the quality of the movies nominated for best picture. This statement is not supported with any data or research, making it an example of hasty generalization. Additionally, there are several instances where the author uses inflammatory rhetoric to describe certain aspects of each movie, such as calling
The 2024 Oscars are set to air on Sunday,
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and ideological bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes the Jewish people by referring to them as 'the Osage Nation' which is a term used in Nazi propaganda. Additionally, the author uses quotes from an interview with Sandra Hüller where she talks about her character being accused of murdering her husband and how it was based on real-life events. This implies that the Holocaust may have been justified or deserved, which is highly offensive and biased.
Sandra Hüller's quote about her character being accused of murdering her husband
The Osage Nation
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
There are multiple conflicts of interest found in this article.
The author is an employee of CNN which has a financial stake in the entertainment industry. This could influence their coverage and recommendations for watching the Oscar movies nominated for best picture.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The article is published by CNN and includes quotes from Sandra Huller, Margot Robbie, Paul Giamatti, Leonardo DiCaprio, Bradley Cooper, Cillian Murphy and Greta Lee who are all actors nominated for Oscars in 2024.
The 96th Oscars are set for Sunday, March 10 at the Dolby Theatre at Ovation Hollywood.
Jimmy Kimmel is hosting Sunday’s Academy Awards for a fourth time and for a second year in a row.
This year’s Oscars will also be available in American Sign Language via livestream.
Accuracy
The ceremony will be airing live on ABC and elsewhere beginning at 4 p.m. PT/7 pm ET, an hour earlier than the Oscarcast's traditional start.
Jimmy Kimmel is hosting Sunday’s Academy Awards for a fourth time, and for a second year in a row.
Deception
(50%)
The article is misleading in several ways. Firstly, it states that the ceremony will start at 4 p.m. PT/7 p.m. ET but fails to mention that this is an hour earlier than usual due to Daylight Saving Time starting on Sunday morning at 2 a.m.
The article claims the ceremony starts at 4 pm PT/7pm ET, but it's actually an hour earlier due to DST.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several logical fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Jimmy Kimmel is hosting Sunday's Academy Awards for a fourth time and for a second year in a row without providing any evidence or context about why he was chosen as host. Secondly, the author makes an informal fallacy by using emotive language such as
The ceremony is airing live on ABC and elsewhere beginning at 4 p.m. PT/7 pm ET,
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Patrick Hipes has a conflict of interest on the topic of Oscars as he is an employee and contributor to Deadline which covers the event.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Patrick Hipes has a conflict of interest on the topic of Oscars as he is an author for Deadline which is one of the sources covering the event.
