NC Republicans override Democrat governor amid voter fraud

Alix's picture
Basic Information

Common Top Level Domain (TLD): 


Other TLD (if selected above): 

Dateline or Post Date: 

No dates found. Enter if you find one.
Website Purpose

About Us Summary: 

"CRTV is your source for the most thought-provoking personalities and conservative ideas that are not available from traditional media outlets. CRTV has developed a new style in producing compelling content with stunning production quality and unique broadcast sets built to capture the individual personality and passion of each program. CRTV is developing the best programming – advocating freedom and liberty – that is delivered directly to viewers – when and where they want it."

Vertical Tabs

Registrant Name: 

[If you know who owns this site, enter them here]
Overall Analysis

Trust Markers: 

Is attached to an organization that actually looks professional. Has news articles mostly on currently relevant topics, and doesn't direct to random clickbait everywhere. Has some sourcing.

Mistrust Markers: 

Probably very biased, called "Conservative review," has only some sourcing, topics covered in other articles are all along general theme.

Trust Rank (1 = high mistrust, 5 = high trust): 


Reason for Trust Rank: 

Likely has small amounts of relevant information but pretty biased.


How much bias makes a source unacceptable

How can you tell



response to your question

Catherine's picture

I believe that a small amount of bias is appropriate as long as it does not effect the choice of evidence for example only using data from bias sources. Articles should make it clear to the reader if they are bias.

I did some research on the author and found that he is a Catholic reporter that could influence his bias. He has been a part of many organisation but seems to have a clear record even winning Washington Times Idol competition getting him an internship for a summer.

I hope this is helpful and makes sense.


No votes yet

The article starts by stating

Sophie's picture

The article starts by stating that there were cases of voter fraud, but does not provide any evidence or links to other articles about the voter fraud. The sources that are provided are not very trustworthy. Also, the site is not very professional.


No votes yet

Untrustworthy & Post Format Suggestions?

RJ's picture

As for the post format and filling in of the submission itself, a couple things you may want to tweak or think of in future posts, is first of the multiple additional source links in which you should usually remove from the post all together.
If a site linked is relevant and needed in the article (such as a bill pdf, and main article attached videos, etc..) it shall stay, but others with no relevance, such as promotion/sponsor sites, and articles that do not help the information of the current article itself, should be removed from that list.
Other small things such as the boxes that hold "Page Last Modified" and "Registrant Name" should be deleted if cannot be filled. Seeing that we still have the default messages of the auto check itself not being able to find them, you may want to replace those with an "N/A", or if available on own search, can find those and fill in manually. But besides that, you could just remove the blanks and it may help clean up the post a bit.

While speaking of that, I myself would feel this site deserves more of a 0-1 rating. We see back to exactly that, of having no last date modified, no other information on author themselves except of a Facebook to follow, no relating sources outside of the click-text in the article as well. There's not much communication and outside interference going on within this source, and does not have an organizational environment feel to it at all really. With no place to comment or discuss, and not much to site doesn't help either. Only a few social media accounts exist on site for outer communication, and the website itself is not designed professionally, or at least strong, in any way. It's appearance is struggling, and is very weak in background ties, with any organizations or companies. All of these are pretty clear signs of a phony site, and absolutely should note be used as a source of reference on any terms by my means. B,)


No votes yet