I don’t think your linked ground truth is useful if the author wanted to try to establish reality or a “non-biased” baseline. I don’t see any attempt in the pa

I don’t think your linked ground truth is useful if the author wanted to try to establish reality or a “non-biased” baseline. I don’t see any attempt in the paper to try to do this or to use your source, or others. The number of fatalities would be hard, I think, to try to show what the violent wording would be used since it quantifies deaths (eg, 200 deaths in a single incident would be reported different than 200 events with one death each). But perhaps trying to determine a correlation of reporting to deaths, or reporting to events. Or any attempt. The biggest problem I have with the paper is that there’s no null hypothesis to disprove, so it “proves bias” without establishing or even estimating what a non-biased corpus looks like.