2026-09-02

Tiger Woods pleads guilty to DUI reckless driving

5 outlets covered the same story. Here's how their headlines landed on the −5 (Far Left) to +5 (Far Right) spectrum — a 0.0-point gap between the most-left and most-right framing.

Far LeftCenterFar Right

How the coverage framed it

Coverage of Tiger Woods's guilty plea was remarkably uniform across outlets, with a bias spread of just 0.0 points and no meaningful ideological divide to observe. Every headline relied on straightforward legal and factual language: outlets consistently used phrases like "pleads guilty to reckless driving," reported the five-year license suspension or ban, and described the plea arrangement in neutral terms such as "plea deal" or "enters plea." The modest variation was purely stylistic rather than ideological — Al Jazeera noted he "forfeits driving licence," the Washington Examiner emphasized the "DUI rollover crash" as context, Sky News framed it as Woods getting "a 5-year driving ban and fine," and Forbes added that he "avoids jail." None of these choices reflect partisan framing; they simply highlight different factual details of the same legal outcome. Readers across the political spectrum received substantively identical information.

Scores are AI estimates of headline language, not factual ratings. Each headline is scored 0 (neutral) outward to Far Left / Far Right by Claude and Grok.