Hannah Jewell,

Hannah Jewell is a liberal journalist and author who works for The Washington Post. She writes daily briefings on current events and politics, often focusing on topics that are unfavorable to Trump and his allies.

Biography: https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/hannah-jewell/

70%

The Daily's Verdict

This author has a mixed reputation for journalistic standards. It is advisable to fact-check, scrutinize for bias, and check for conflicts of interest before relying on the author's reporting.

Bias

80%

Examples:

She also uses exaggerated or sensationalized language to describe events, such as calling Putin's election win a 'landslide' and describing Iceland volcano as opening a fissure.
She often uses words like 'nasty', 'riot', and 'classifiedǩ to create a negative tone and impression of the subjects she writes about.
The author tends to present information that favors a negative view of Trump and his allies, such as calling him a liar and accusing him of dehumanizing immigrants. She also seems to support Biden's policies and downplays any controversies or scandals involving him.

Conflicts of Interest

100%

Examples:

She does not disclose any potential sources of income or funding for her work, which raises questions about her credibility and independence.
She may have personal or professional ties to some of the organizations or individuals she writes about, such as OpenAI Sora.
The author has a clear conflict of interest by writing articles that are biased against Trump and his supporters. She is also an author of books that mock conservatives and promote liberal values.

Contradictions

85%

Examples:

She also contradicts her own previous articles by changing the date of some events or omitting important details.
She seems to have a bias against Boeing and TikTok, as she repeatedly uses deceptive language to portray them in a negative light without providing any sources or context.
The author often contradicts herself by presenting information that is not consistent with other sources or facts. For example, she claims that Putin claimed a landslide victory despite protests and condemnation from international leaders, but does not provide any evidence for this claim.

Deceptions

30%

Examples:

She also uses vague and misleading language to describe events, such as calling Navalny's death a 'assassinationǩ without providing any proof or motive.
She may have access to confidential or classified information that she does not disclose in her articles.
The author uses deception by omitting important information that contradicts her claims. For example, she does not mention any evidence for Trump's alleged business dealings with Biden or the Ukrainian energy firm.