2026-10-08

Pro-ISIS man allegedly planned Mall of America attack

3 outlets covered the same story. Here's how their headlines landed on the −5 (Far Left) to +5 (Far Right) spectrum — a 4.0-point gap between the most-left and most-right framing.

Far LeftCenterFar Right

How the coverage framed it

Coverage of this story spans a notable 4-point range, from factual neutrality to charged ideological framing. CBS News anchored the center with clinical language — "eyed," "pledging allegiance," and a clear attribution to "federal prosecutors" — keeping the focus on the alleged conduct and its legal status. The Washington Examiner moved rightward by framing the incident as evidence of a broader national trend, with the phrase "resurgence of radicalization in US" casting the story as a systemic warning rather than an isolated criminal case, amplified further by an opinion byline. The Federalist reached the far end of the spectrum by introducing the suspect's ethnicity ("Somali") and the derogatory immigration term "Anchor Baby," neither of which appears in the legal framing. That language shifts the story's center of gravity from an alleged terror plot to immigration policy and ethnic identity, substantially widening the story's ideological charge beyond the underlying facts.

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.