People keep repeating it almost as if there's no way to improve. I think that if we instead of classifying news as real/fake or neutral/biased, we should classi

People keep repeating it almost as if there's no way to improve. I think that if we instead of classifying news as real/fake or neutral/biased, we should classify it as honest/misleading. If a story gives a different impression to reality, it's misleading. That can be easily identified sometimes, especially in articles based on numerical data. Has a stock price "plummeted" or fallen by 2 percentage points? This criterion would only apply to the presentation of the information within a story, not the choice of stories or even the choice of information sources, since there could be too much to choose from. There, traditional honest unavoidable bias would still exist. But without this blatant dishonesty that commonly occurs, people wouldn't be quite so misled.