Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
The Los Angeles Times’ proposed AI “bias meter” began as a plan Soon-Shiong described as covering news and opinion, but he later told the paper he meant labels for editorials and opinion columns—not news stories. In March 2025, the Times announced a related feature called Insights for some point-of-view content labeled Voices. The paper described what Insights is meant to do, but the sources available do not establish its current reach or independently verified accuracy.
What did Patrick Soon-Shiong first propose?
In early December 2024, Los Angeles Times owner and executive chairman Patrick Soon-Shiong publicly described an AI-powered “bias meter” that would show readers the ideological bent of content and offer alternative viewpoints. His initial comments were reported as applying to both news and opinion. That broad description is the reason the proposal drew attention: it suggested that political labels might appear on news stories, not just opinion writing. TheWrap reported the initial plan on December 4, 2024, and The Guardian covered the proposal on December 6.
In a later interview with the Times, Soon-Shiong clarified that he intended the meter as an added label on editorials and opinion columns, not news stories. He described a far-left-to-far-right scale based on analysis of five decades of the paper’s editorials and columns. He also said readers could click a button to see an AI-compiled story or stories offering alternative viewpoints. The Times published the interview on December 15, 2024.
What did the Los Angeles Times announce as Insights?
On March 3, 2025, Soon-Shiong’s letter to readers introduced Insights as an AI-driven feature appearing on some content labeled Voices. He described Voices as a label for content written from a point of view: a category that can include commentary, criticism and reviews, not only conventional opinion columns. In his words, “Any content written from a point of view may be labeled Voices, which helps to strengthen the separation between what’s news and what’s not.” The full letter sets out the Times’ announcement.
#1 Best Overall
The announced product description differs in scope and framing from the original public account. The first account was reported as extending to news and opinion; Soon-Shiong later said he meant opinion labels, and the March letter described AI analysis on some Voices pieces. The announcement does not establish that every news story receives a political label.
| Question | Initial public description and clarification | March 2025 Insights description |
|---|---|---|
| What content is covered? | Initially described as news and opinion; Soon-Shiong later told the Times he intended labels for editorials and opinion columns, not news stories. | AI analysis on some Voices content, a label for writing from a point of view that may include commentary, criticism and reviews. |
| What does the political label describe? | A far-left-to-far-right scale for editorials and columns, according to Soon-Shiong’s clarification. | Where expressed views may fall on the political spectrum, according to the publisher. |
| What else is offered? | Soon-Shiong described an AI-compiled story or stories with alternative viewpoints. | The Times said Insights provides an annotated summary and different views from a variety of sources. |
| Who creates the analysis? | The initial accounts describe an AI-powered proposal. | The Times said Insights analysis is not created by its editorial staff. |
| Has accuracy been independently established? | No independent accuracy validation is supplied in the cited accounts. | No independent accuracy score or validation study is supplied with the announcement. |
What does Insights say it evaluates—and what does it not?
According to the Times, Insights identifies where views expressed in a piece may sit on the political spectrum, provides an annotated summary and presents different views from a variety of sources. The publisher also says the analysis “makes no judgment on the quality of any piece of journalism or the viewpoint it espouses.” That is the newspaper’s description of the feature’s intended limits, not an independent assessment of how the AI works in practice.
Rank #2
The distinction matters: a political-position label is not, by itself, a finding that a story is inaccurate, unfair or poorly reported. Nor does an alternative-view summary demonstrate that the original reporting is wrong. Readers should treat the label and summary as additional material to evaluate, rather than as a substitute for judging evidence and reporting.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What concerns were raised, and what evidence is missing?
The proposal prompted concerns about whether an AI system could label political positioning reliably and whether such labels would help readers. The Los Angeles Times Guild’s response, reported by The Guardian, was that the owner had suggested staff harbored bias “without offering evidence or examples.” The Times’ announcement describes Insights as experimental, but the cited reports and reader letter do not provide an independent accuracy study or validation statistic.
As of October 2026, the sources cited here do not establish Insights’ operational status, how widely it appears, or its technical performance. The March 2025 letter documents the publisher’s announcement and stated scope; it should not be treated as proof that the original, broadly described news-story meter launched or that the later feature is currently available across the site.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
