See through the spin in any article
BiasChecker reads the article with you — surfacing the bias, the persuasion, and what's been conveniently left out. Pick a lens and the analysis runs in seconds.
How it works
1 · One click, any page
Click the extension icon on any article — news sites, blogs, anywhere. No copy-pasting, no new tabs.
2 · Pick your lens
Results appear in a side panel with thirteen analysis tabs — from bias and persuasion to synthesis, an analyst's report built from the other analyses.
3 · Read side by side
Every finding cites the exact passage it comes from, so you can check the analysis against the article as you read.
No extension yet? Paste any text on the analyse page and run the same lenses right here on the site.
Thirteen expert lenses
Ever wish you could get an expert opinion on that article you just read? Now you can. Uncover hidden assumptions. See what the evidence actually supports and where the science gets speculative. Get a legal take, a moral perspective, or discover if history has seen this before — and how it played out. Each analysis goes beyond pointing out gaps to show what stronger, fairer coverage would look like.
Spot the slant
Is it slanted, and how is it working on you?
Intent Analysis
Read between the lines
Exposes the gap between what a text literally says and what the author wants you to conclude — and includes a concise summary of the piece. Cuts through spin to show the real message.
Persuasion
Uncover hidden influence techniques
A focused lens on 8 persuasion mechanics and 8 logical fallacies in action — a deliberately narrower view than the full Bias Analysis.
Bias Analysis
See what the author wants you to believe
Scans for 29 categories of bias including political, gender, racial, framing, and omission bias. Each finding includes evidence from the text.
Omissions
Notice what was left out
Surfaces the facts, context, perspectives, and counterpoints a well-informed reader would expect — but the article leaves out.
Check the substance
Does it hold up?
Critique
Think deeper about what you read
A comprehensive critical thinking analysis that identifies unsupported claims, missing context, logical flaws, and oversimplifications.
Legal Risk
Check legal soundness
Evaluates whether proposals or claims comply with criminal, civil, constitutional, and international law.
Moral Lens
Evaluate ethical implications
Assesses content against 13 universal moral principles including dignity, honesty, equality, justice, and freedom.
Scientific Assessment
Separate science from pseudoscience
Detects factual errors, pseudoscience, cherry-picked data, misrepresented evidence, and causal fallacies in scientific claims.
Get the context & extras
What is the fuller picture?
Background
Get up to speed fast
Builds the context around a topic: what it is, how it developed over time, and where things stand now — orientation for a reader new to the story.
Historical Parallels
Learn from the past
Finds historical precedents for current events. Understand patterns, draw parallels, and learn from how similar situations played out.
Rewrite
Read it de-spun
The article rewritten neutrally and more briefly. Strictly subtractive: it never adds a fact, so you can check the de-spun, condensed version against the source.
Roast
The fun one
A warm, witty comedian’s take on the article — a punchy verdict and a few standalone jokes about its most roastable details. Pure entertainment.
Then let it all come together
Synthesis
Combines the other 12 lensesAn analyst’s report, built from your other analyses
The consolidating lens: instead of reading the article yet again, it writes an analyst’s report from the results of the other lenses. You get a one-sentence verdict on what the piece is doing to its reader, a short narrative connecting the findings into one story, an honest note on what checks out, and what to verify before forming a view. Building it costs one normal synthesis run; analyses you already have are always reused free, and if core analyses are missing it states how many it will run (each billed like any analysis) before anything starts.
Don't trust one AI
Consensus
Several AIs, one verdictEvery model has its own blind spots — agreement between rival models is the strongest signal an analysis can give.
Pick Consensus from the model menu and a panel of models from different AI makers, one seat per maker, each analyses the article independently; an editor model then merges their findings into one result. The rule is strict and enforced in code, not left to the AI: a finding makes it into the consensus only when at least two models support it, and if the panel agrees on nothing you get an honest empty result. Every model on the panel is named at the bottom. It is offered on the verdict-style lenses (Bias, Persuasion, Omissions, Critique, Legal, Moral, Scientific); you pay for the models that actually run, and panel members already cached for the article are reused free.
Compare models side by side
Prefer to see the split yourself? Run the same article through two models and compare where they agree and where they differ — or browse the comparisons we publish.
See real model comparisons →Your account & privacy
BiasChecker.ai uses Google Sign-In. We request only your name, email address, and profile picture — solely to identify your account. We never access your Gmail, Drive, contacts, or other Google services, and you can revoke access at any time in your Google Account settings.
Read our full Privacy Policy →