Each one is something you can see in the words on the page. None of them needs you to know who wrote it or why.
None of them tells you whether a story is true, either. They show you how it’s built, so you know what you’re being asked to accept and what you can check. The examples are all made up.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Balance
You only get one side.
When it’s done well: Both sides get a fair say.
Most news has more than one side: people who disagree, or people affected in different ways. When only one of them gets to talk, you are hearing a case being made, not the whole story.
Weak
“The new bus routes are a disaster for working families,” said council member Ana Price. “Nobody asked us,” said a rider who waited 40 minutes on Tuesday.
Strong
Council member Ana Price called the new routes “a disaster for working families.” Transit director Sam Okafor said the changes cut the average wait by six minutes, and that the city will review ridership in March. Two riders we spoke with were split.
Same news. The first gives you one side’s case. The second lets you weigh it.
Spot it yourself
Who gets quoted, and who only gets talked about?
Is there someone who would disagree? Do they get a word?
When the other side shows up, is it in their own words or someone else’s summary?
What it doesn’t mean. One-sided isn’t the same as wrong. Sometimes one side really does have the better case. It means you’re only seeing part of the picture.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Logic
It tells you what to feel before it tells you what happened.
When it’s done well: It sticks to what happened.
Some stories lead with the feeling (outrage, fear, pride) and bring in the facts later, if at all. By the time you learn what happened, you already know how you’re supposed to feel about it.
Weak
In a stunning betrayal, the school board gutted the arts program Thursday night, leaving heartbroken kids with nothing.
Strong
The school board voted 5 to 2 on Thursday to cut the arts budget by 30 percent, from $1.2 million to $840,000. Two elementary art teacher jobs will not be refilled.
Same vote. The first tells you how to feel. The second tells you what happened and lets you decide how you feel.
Spot it yourself
Circle the loaded words: stunning, slammed, betrayal, chaos. How many come before the first fact?
Can you say what happened without using any of them?
Is the feeling coming from the facts, or from the words wrapped around them?
What it doesn’t mean. Strong feelings aren’t wrong, and some events deserve them. It means the article is doing the feeling for you instead of letting the facts do it.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Autonomy
It does your thinking for you.
When it’s done well: It lets you make up your own mind.
A good article gives you what you need to decide. A pushy one decides for you, then tells you what to think: “clearly,” “everyone knows,” “there’s only one way to see this.”
Weak
Clearly, the only sensible response is to reject the plan. Anyone who looks at the numbers can see where this leads.
Strong
Supporters say the plan will lower costs within three years. Critics point to a similar program in another state that ran over budget. The council votes next month.
The first hands you a conclusion. The second hands you the pieces.
Spot it yourself
Look for “clearly,” “obviously,” “we all know,” “the real question is.”
Does it end on a verdict, or on what’s still open?
Could a reasonable person finish it and disagree? Does it leave room for that?
What it doesn’t mean. Opinion pieces are supposed to argue a point, and that’s fine when it’s labeled. It means this one is steering, so you know to notice it.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Evidence
Big claims. Not much behind them.
When it’s done well: It shows its work.
A claim is only as strong as what holds it up: data, documents, records, people who saw it happen. When the claims are big and the support is thin, you’re being asked to accept the conclusion anyway.
Weak
The new policy has been a complete failure and is hurting thousands of families across the state.
Strong
Since the policy took effect in January, applications have dropped 18 percent, according to state records. The state has not said how many families lost coverage.
The first is a verdict. The second is a fact you could check, plus an honest note about what isn’t known yet.
Spot it yourself
Find the biggest claim. What is holding it up?
Is there a number, a document or a first-hand account, or just the claim itself?
If you wanted to, could you check it?
What it doesn’t mean. Thin support doesn’t make a claim false. It means the article hasn’t shown it’s true yet.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Sourcing
You’re asked to take their word for it.
When it’s done well: You can check who said what.
Every claim in a news story comes from somewhere. When you can’t tell where, or when it all comes from one person, you’re being asked to trust the article instead of check it.
Weak
Officials say the plant will close by spring, according to people familiar with the plans.
Strong
The plant will close by March 1, plant manager Dana Ruiz told employees on Tuesday. A company filing with the state, dated Sept. 3, gives the same date.
Same news. In the second one you know who said it, and there’s a document backing them up.
Spot it yourself
Circle every “said.” Is there a name next to it?
Count the voices. Is it all one person, or one side?
Look for something you could check: a filing, a report, a recording.
What it doesn’t mean. Unnamed doesn’t mean wrong. Sometimes a source can’t be named for good reasons. It means you’re taking it on trust, so hold it a little more loosely.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Specificity
Lots of words. Few facts you can check.
When it’s done well: Names, numbers, dates. All checkable.
Specific facts are names, numbers, dates and places: the parts of a story you could look up. Vague writing (“many experts,” “recently,” “a significant increase”) sounds informed but gives you nothing to hold on to.
Weak
Many residents have recently raised serious concerns about a significant rise in local crime.
Strong
Car break-ins in the Eastside district rose from 41 to 67 between June and August, according to police data. Twelve residents spoke at Tuesday’s council meeting.
The first sounds like news. The second is news: every piece of it can be checked.
Spot it yourself
Count the names, numbers and dates.
Swap each vague word for a question (how many? who? when?). Does the article answer it?
Pick one fact. Could you look it up?
What it doesn’t mean. Early reports are often vague because the facts aren’t in yet. It means there’s not much here to check.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Claims
Numbers that sound exact, with nothing behind them.
When it’s done well: Every number comes with where it’s from.
Numbers feel like proof. But a number with no source, no starting point and no time frame can sound precise and tell you nothing. Up 300 percent from what? Counted by whom?
Weak
Complaints have skyrocketed 300 percent, proving the program is broken.
Strong
Complaints rose from 4 to 16 in the program’s first year, according to the city’s annual report, out of about 9,000 people enrolled.
Same numbers. “300 percent” is technically true of both. Only the second tells you it’s 16 complaints out of 9,000.
Spot it yourself
Where does the number come from?
What is it out of? A percent needs a starting point.
Is one number being asked to prove a big conclusion?
What it doesn’t mean. A number without a source may still be right. It means you can’t tell from the article.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Context
It leaves out what you’d need to judge it.
When it’s done well: It tells you compared to what.
A fact on its own can mean almost anything. Is 200 a lot? Compared to what? Up from when? Context is the before, the compared-to and the background that tell you what a fact actually means.
Weak
The county reported 200 cases of the flu last week.
Strong
The county reported 200 flu cases last week, up from 150 in the same week last year and in line with the five-year average for early winter.
The first could be alarming or ordinary. The second tells you which.
Spot it yourself
For every number, ask: compared to what?
Is there a before and after?
Does it tell you how things got here, or does the story start in the middle?
What it doesn’t mean. Leaving out context isn’t the same as hiding it. Short stories run short. It means you’ll need the rest from somewhere else before you judge it.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Nuance
It makes a messy story sound simple.
When it’s done well: It admits what’s complicated.
Most real problems come with trade-offs, unknowns and people with good reasons on more than one side. A story that turns all of that into one clean answer is easier to read, and it leaves out how the thing actually works.
Weak
The new traffic cameras will finally make our streets safe.
Strong
Cities that added red-light cameras saw fewer side-impact crashes but more rear-end collisions, a federal review found. Results varied widely from one intersection to the next.
The first promises an answer. The second tells you what the answer costs.
Spot it yourself
Is any trade-off mentioned?
Does it admit anything is unknown?
Watch for “finally,” “the answer,” “simply.”
What it doesn’t mean. Some things really are simple. It means this article isn’t showing you the complicated parts, if there are any.
Someone shared a Clear-Sight read with you. This is the line on their card.
Consistency
It doesn’t agree with itself.
When it’s done well: The story holds together.
A story should hold together from top to bottom. When the headline says one thing and the body says another, or a number changes halfway through, something got lost on the way.
Weak
Headline: “Stadium deal will cost taxpayers nothing.” Paragraph nine: “The city will cover $40 million in road and parking upgrades.”
Strong
Headline: “Stadium deal leaves city covering $40 million in upgrades.” The body says the team pays for the stadium, the city pays for roads and parking, and the $40 million is the same every time it appears.
The first headline is contradicted by its own article. The second says up front what the body goes on to show.
Spot it yourself
Does the headline match what the article says?
Do the numbers stay the same every time they appear?
Does the ending follow from what came before it?
What it doesn’t mean. A mismatch is often a rushed edit, not a trick. It means you should lean on the parts you can check.