Bias I've seen in politically charged articles: - Only allowing "reliable sources", and defining that based on criteria which essentially excludes any right wi

Bias I've seen in politically charged articles: - Only allowing "reliable sources", and defining that based on criteria which essentially excludes any right wing publication, even when the unreliable source has irrefutable evidence of the claim (video, etc). Similarly, citing claims from 'reliable' sources that are misleading, or slightly incorrect (you don't need to look at many news articles to find an example of this) - Using social academic sources, like gender studies, to cite things that are literally just opinions. Social sciences have a lot of these publications putting forth claims, that are basically citing each other in a circle, with the root claim being someone's opinion (usually grievance studies). - Citing lack of 'relevance' to stifle any claim that doesn't fall under the above two. Who decides what's relevant? Well that's the trick; there's no objective criteria, so the power mods decide it.