now we know how bad voter fraud in north carolina is

Allison's picture
Basic Information

Common Top Level Domain (TLD): 

com

Other TLD (if selected above): 

Dateline or Post Date: 

4/24/17
Support for Claims
Website Purpose

About Us Summary: 

"CharlotteObserver.com originally launched as Charlotte.com in 1996, and today is the Carolinas' most visited news and information website. We are the online version of The Charlotte Observer, sharing content with McClatchy affiliates and our interactive partner, WBTV/WBTV.com."

Vertical Tabs

Registrant Name: 

[If you know who owns this site, enter them here]
Overall Analysis

Trust Markers: 

No ads, appears to use credible videos and photos, established newspaper.

Mistrust Markers: 

Some biased language and the article is listed as an editorial/opinion piece.

Trust Rank (1 = high mistrust, 5 = high trust): 

4

Reason for Trust Rank: 

Credible but take the information with a grain of salt as it is a republican/right-wing leaning paper.

Questions: 

like0

Comments

Personal Opinion

Cam's picture

This article includes a large amount of click-bait at the bottom of the page and on the side. It also includes many places where the author wants you to share on a variety of social platform. The picture used is also quite a low quality picture. I want to trust this because of the information presented seems correct, but there are many factors which lead me to believe that it's fake. Is there an audience that the Charlotte Observer is meant for?

Rating: 

0
No votes yet
like0

The fact that it's tied to an

Alix's picture

The fact that it's tied to an official newspaper and apparently pretty widely read in its state is promising. The article title feels somewhat unprofessional but the lack of ads and such also supports its trustworthiness.

Rating: 

0
No votes yet
like0

A Little More Information

Lucia's picture

Heres a little more information to add. 1.) The data in the article from a single, but reliable, source: "an extensive, objective audit of the 2016 election" provided by the State Board of Elections. 2.)The "suggested articles" at the bottom appear to to be click bate. 3.)There is no click tracking on the page, indicating a more reliable source. 4.)Most importantly, the Charlotte Observer is a legitimate news paper with at least one physical office, an extensive staff, and a physical printed paper (you can visit their "contact us" page to find out more about their location and staff). This means that the article wasn't made up by a singe individual using outrageous, made up headlines to make money off "clicks." The Charlotte Observer makes money off being a respected news source, not off lying on social media. It is possible that the paper presents occasional incorrect facts and from reading the article is is evident that there is a conservative bias. It is also possible that at times the paper might skew on particular fact out of proportion to present a situation in a light they want it shown. Cam, the audience of the Charlotte Observed is the area surrounding it. The news paper is based in Mecklenburg County which actually voted 66% -34% in favor of Hillary in the 2016 election. However, the majority of the surrounding counties voted overwhelmingly republican. The conservative location of the paper probably effects its bias. Overall, I would also rank this paper as a 4 for several reasons. First, like most news papers, this Charlotte Observer is bound to occasionally get facts wrong. Second, the news paper has a bias. However, I still generally trust the paper because its articles are based off fact and because the source is very established and appears to be respected.

Rating: 

0
No votes yet
like0