news platform developers

Abstract: Fact-checking explanations help Web users understand why a claim receives its verdict, yet the same explanation may not satisfy readers with different backgrounds and preferences. We formulate Faithful Personalized Fact-Checking Explanation Rewriting, which adapts an existing explanation to individual readers while preserving factual fidelity. Rather than relying on reader-written reference explanations, we learn personalized rewriting from the relative preferences of LLM-simulated readers. However, this presents two challenges: distinguishing persona-specific preferences from general explanation quality and learning beyond a limited set of predefined explanation styles. To address these challenges, we propose Personalized Explanation Rewriting via Preference Learning (PERPL), a framework consisting of two components. Simulated Preference Construction derives persona-specific supervision from simulated reader preferences through cross-persona reciprocal pairing. Progressive Preference Learning first trains a lightweight rewriter on the constructed supervision and then refines it through exploration-guided preference optimization, enabling it to discover preferred explanations beyond the predefined styles. Extensive experiments demonstrate that PERPL outperforms much larger general-purpose LLMs in personalized preference alignment while maintaining high factual fidelity.

Abstract: Persuasive writing exploits cognitive biases, recruiting a reader's mental shortcuts to shape belief, often without the reader noticing. We call the linguistic features exploiting such mental shortcuts cognitive bias triggers. As large language models (LLMs) increasingly mediate how people encounter news, summarizing it, ranking it, and answering questions over it, a natural question is whether they can recognize the features of a text that bias a human reader. We introduce BAIT (Bias Annotation In Text), a resource for detecting cognitive bias triggers in news. BAIT pairs a schema of nine triggers, each specified in an annotator codebook, with 50 English news articles annotated by trained annotators at the article and span levels and adjudicated into a gold standard. On this data we define two tasks, detecting which triggers a text contains and locating the spans that carry them. We then benchmark six frontier LLMs zero-shot and with three or ten in-context examples. The models approach human agreement on which triggers an article contains, but rarely recover its full set of triggers, and they reach less than half of human agreement in locating the passages that carry them. Moreover, they over-predict triggers that come with easy surface cues, and most of the passages they mark for these triggers are not triggers, yet carry the trigger's surface cue far more often than random text. These findings suggest that the evaluated LLMs respond to surface cues rather than to the mechanisms that make a passage manipulative. We release the schema, the codebook, standoff annotations, and the evaluation pipeline.

Abstract: Generative AI search and AI overviews are transforming access to information and news, renewing concerns that readers will encounter a narrower range of topics and have less in common. We examine these concerns via a randomized field experiment with 37,561 readers at The Washington Post. Both groups searched the same archive, but treatment readers also received AI answers with article citations above conventional results. Measuring consumption across displayed answers and opened articles, we find that AI search expands the reach of widely read topics and increases overlap in readers' topic consumption. At the same time, consumption becomes less concentrated and shifts toward less-popular topics, both within readers and across the audience. AI answers account for most of the increase in shared information, delivering it without requiring article clicks and broadening exposure beyond the articles readers open. Cited articles also contribute to the shift toward less-popular topics. Readers shift from conventional-result clicks and browsing toward cited articles and follow-up searches. More frequent searching offsets lower article consumption per search, producing a small increase in article consumption per reader. Total information consumption per minute also rises. Generative AI search can thus diversify collective attention while strengthening the information readers have in common.

Abstract: A key factor in deciding whether to trust an automatic prediction is its confidence score, which should be calibrated to match the actual probability of the prediction being correct. Most confidence calibration metrics target binary or multi-class tasks, while multi-label calibration remains largely underexplored. Multi-label classification tasks, such as assigning medical codes to clinical notes or determining news topics, are usually dominated by a large number of negatives, i.e., labels that do not apply. We show that existing binning schemes to compute label-wise expected calibration error either underestimate the error, simply reflect label frequency, or suffer from many bins with very few instances. To achieve trustworthy label-wise calibration errors, we propose a new binning scheme that gives equal weight to positive and negative label assignments. Our empirical study demonstrates that in contrast to existing binning schemes, our new scheme results in meaningful estimates of calibration error in hierarchical and in extreme multi-label classification. We also show that calibrating confidence scores of large language models for multi-label predictions is an open challenge. Our detailed analysis lays the foundation for further research by providing a solid evaluation metric for measuring calibration in multi-label classification.

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to analyze and rewrite news, yet current framing studies mainly evaluate generation, detection, or whether rewritten text appears more neutral. They do not directly show whether a model can undo a known framing transformation while keeping the facts fixed. We introduce a controlled inversion test over three established textual realizations of framing: evaluative lexis, agency realization, and information salience. Across 60 news articles and three intervention strengths, this yields 540 paired variants with preserved atomic facts and recorded edits. Across Qwen, DeepSeek, and Kimi, factual preservation remains near 0.84, whereas intervention reversal is 0.044--0.068. Even when both framing type and direction are recognized correctly, pooled reversal reaches 0.071. These results reveal a clear separation between factual fidelity, framing recognition, and framing inversion: recognizing how an article is framed does not imply that the framing can be undone.