The Elitist Media’s network evening news collectively whined over the Department of Justice’s announcement of a nearly $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund intended to redress the grievances of those who claim to have been targeted by the Biden Department of Justice. ABC saw this as an opportunity to doctor President Donald Trump’s January 6th speech, as did the BBC. Watch as ABC splices Trump's speech and fabricates a quote out of whole cloth: HOLY JUMP CUT, ABC: @ABCWorldNews' report on DoJ anti-weaponization fund comes mighty close to BBC territory with its splicing of Trump J6 speech pic.twitter.com/xVQHaaP9F8 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 18, 2026 RACHEL SCOTT: President Trump told his supporters to march to the Capitol. DONALD TRUMP: We’re going to walk down to the Capitol (VIDEO SWIPE) because you'll never take back our country with weakness. Anyone distracted with a phone or not watching the screen at that time can well have not seen the swipe effect, and believe that the spliced video is an actual quote (the video portions are several seconds apart). If this seems familiar, it is because the BBC infamously spliced portions of Trump’s J6 speech for a documentary: NEW: The Telegraph reports that an internal whistleblower memo claims the BBC “doctored” Donald Trump’s Jan. 6 speech, making it seem as though he encouraged the Capitol riot. pic.twitter.com/GORW82yeVS — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) November 3, 2025 ABC’s egregious video was published in service of a January 6th narrative against the establishment of the DoJ fund. And ABC weren’t the only ones to push this narrative line. CBS did so also, at the end of a report on Thomas Massie’s primary election:  CBS EVENING NEWS 5/18/26 6:42 PM TONY DOKOUPIL: Speaking of, the president today withdrew a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS, this all tied to the leak of his tax returns and the settlement involves the creation of a $1.8 billion fund. What do you know about that? ED O’KEEFE: That’s right. The Justice Department calls it an anti-weaponization fund and says that the money will be used to compensate people who claimed they were targeted by the Biden Justice Department or by Democrats. The DoJ says the fund will have the power to issue monetary relief owed to claimants. Democrats are worried this is going to be used as some kind of slush fund and could also be used by those who have been charged or convicted of crimes associated with the January 6th insurrection. Tony. DOKOUPIL: Ed, thank you very much. NBC went the same route, hyperfocusing on January 6th. Here’s the report submitted by Kelly O’Donnell: Watch: NBC, like the rest of the media, make J6 the focus of the Trump DoJ anti-weaponization fund. No mention of the Biden FACE Act prosecutions, persecution of nuns, Latin Mass adherents, et al TOM LLAMAS: We want to head to Washington now, and a growing controversy over the… pic.twitter.com/rrf26jqWjr — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 19, 2026 NBC NIGHTLY NEWS 5/18/26 6:41 PM TOM LLAMAS: We want to head to Washington now, and a growing controversy over the Trump administration's move to create a $1.7 billion fund to compensate people they say were wrongly prosecuted by the Biden administration. Kelly O'Donnell joins us now, and this is all in exchange for President Trump dropping lawsuits? KELLY O’DONNELL: Tom, this is an extraordinary legal drama that involves the president dropping his multiple lawsuits against the federal government, including against the IRS for a leak of his tax returns. But in exchange, the Trump administration today created what it calls an anti-weaponization fund. Using more than $1.7 billion of taxpayer money that could pay out compensation to Trump allies who say they were unfairly prosecuted by the Biden administration. Possibly including January 6th rioters who were pardoned by President Trump. Democrats are calling this “corrupt” and “an abuse of power.” Tom. LLAMAS: All right, Kelly O’Donnell at The White House for us. Kelly, we thank you for that. Same formula, same January 6th arguments. All of this by design. By making the fund about January 6th, the Elitist Media paper over the many other weaponizations of government carried out by the Biden administration. You’ll note the zero mentions of FACE Act prosecutions. Mark Houck was dragged out of his home and in front of his family by federal agents, only to be found not guilty of violating the FACE Act at trial.  Likewise there are no mentions of the nuns targeted by the BIden DoJ, the persecution of Latin Mass adherents, or the concerned parents who didn’t want their kids transitioned at school behind their backs, or who protested the rape of their daughters in girls’ restrooms. As is often the case, we are reminded that if it weren’t for double standards, there would be none at all. Click “expand” to view the transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on ABC World News Tonight on Monday, May 18th, 2026: ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT 5/18/26 6:41 PM DAVID MUIR: We turn now to your money tonight. The Justice Department has now set up a fund paid for in taxpayer money, $1.8 billion. What the president calls an anti-weaponization fund to compensate Trump allies, including the rioters on January 6th. Here's Rachel Scott. RACHEL SCOTT: Tonight, the Justice Department announcing a new so-called anti weaponization fund, $1.8 billion in taxpayer money to be given away to allies of President Trump who claimed they were unfairly treated by the Biden DoJ. Among those who could see payouts, the 1600 people charged in connection with the riot at the Capitol on January 6th, President Trump told his supporters to march to the Capitol. DONALD TRUMP: We’re going to walk down to the Capitol (VIDEO SWIPE) because you'll never take back our country with weakness. SCOTT: Today, the president defending the new fund. TRUMP: This is reimbursing people that were horribly treated, horribly treated. It's anti-weaponization. They've been weaponized. They've been, in some cases, imprisoned wrongly. SCOTT: The fund is part of a legal settlement between President Trump and his own administration. The president agreeing to drop his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of some of his tax returns several years ago. He's also dropping $230 million in claims against the Justice Department for investigations they launched against him. President Trump has acknowledged the unprecedented circumstances- a president suing his own administration, which he controls. Democrats tonight calling it a MAGA slush fund. CHUCK SCHUMER: Trump pardoned violent insurrectionists who assaulted your Capitol to overturn your votes, and now he wants to give them your hard-earned tax dollars as a reward. Can you believe that? SCOTT: And again, David, we're talking about nearly $1.8 billion of taxpayer money. This fund will expire a few weeks before the president leaves office. David. MUIR: Rachel Scott with us. Thank you. Rachel.  

Democrats want to exploit the war in Iran to claim they’re the Affordability Party. Trump bluntly answered a question from Daily Caller reporter Reagan Reese by saying Americans’ financial situation didn’t matter “not even a little bit” in his negotiating with Iran to end the war. “They can’t have a nuclear weapon.”   MRC Business associate editor Joseph Vazquez and NewsBusters contributor Steve Malzberg joined the show to discuss this topic and more. The Reese exchange went like this:  REAGAN REESE: When you're negotiating with Iran, Mr. President, to what extent are Americans financial situation motivating you to make a deal? DONALD TRUMP: Not even a little bit. The only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran, they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about Americans financial situation. CNN Democrat contributor Xochitl Hinojosa was eager to exploit this statement: "I don't know why we don't have ads up running in every swing congressional district with those comments, but they need to be up fast." Trump was clearly asked about his negotiating position with Iran, and he doesn't want go soft in the press. But his ratings on the economy right now are dismal.  Steve reported on CNN reporter Mathew Chance getting the opportunity to report inside Iran....with all the Iranian government-managed talking points. They proclaimed: "We'd like to note that CNN only operates there with the permission of the Iranian government, as is required under local regulations, but maintains full editorial control over what it reports." It sounded more like a rerun of Peter Arnett's robotic reports from inside Iraq. They lament the bombing of bridges...without discussing the security objectives of cutting off arms supplies.  Joey explained how Alex Soros has now pledged $30 million to fight antisemitism, which is a little odd since the Soros empire has sided with anti-semites. Joey wrote:“Alex Soros pledging a fortune to fight antisemites is about as believable as an arsonist dressing up as a firefighter.” MRC Business also exposed a horrific 2007 pro-Hamas op-ed written by George Soros himself calling on America and Israel to “open the door to Hamas.”  So they can bring a gun or a bomb? Finally, there's the tilt of Saturday Night Live. NBC's jumped the comedy shark in 2016 when Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton and their "cold open" to begin the show was their Hillary impersonator Kate McKinnon singing Leonard Cohen's sad song "Hallelujah" instead of trying to be funny. They were all too emotionally wrecked to be funny. Right after Trump was inaugurated, they wallowed in their feelings again by singing "To Sir With Love" as a tribute to President Obama. It's become quite clear that this "iconic" show has become weaponized against Trump, as it seems almost every show opens with an anti-Trump skit, and the "Weekend Update" fake-news segment is a cesspool of ugly anti-Republican mockery.  Season 51 recently came to an end, and it was considerably more liberal than Season 50. A new NewsBusters study by Alex Christy has found that 91 percent of the season’s Weekend Update jokes were directed at conservatives, while 81 percent of its “cold open” political characters were conservatives or Republicans. You can enjoy the podcast below, or the audio is here. 

On Monday’s Morning Joe, the MS NOW program started its week with a defense of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs. MS NOW opinion writer Ja’han Jones gave a defense of DEI with use of buzzwords that called the Trump Administration “illiberal,” “authoritarian,” fascist, and “the most brazenly white supremacist regime in modern history,” partly due to policies against DEI. Nine a.m. host Jonathan Lemire introduced Jones as an expert on the topic of DEI amid stories of a remaining prevalence in private companies, as Jones started with labels of the Trump administration as “authoritarian” among others: So, this really does boil down to what I believe to be the biggest story of Trump's second term, which is one of corporate acquiescence, prostration to Trump's illiberal, authoritarian, or absurd demands. The assault on diversity is a prime example of this.    In the segment on DEI, MS NOW opinion writer Ja’han Jones used all the buzzwords to describe the Trump Administration. At the end of the segment, he called the administration “the most brazenly white supremacist regime in modern history." pic.twitter.com/DH5UBNESKa — Nick (@nspin310) May 18, 2026   Jones continued to defend DEI and said, “So it rests on all sorts of lies, primarily the lie that DEI programs are harmful to white men. This has been demonstrably false. There are all sorts of programs that benefit several classes of white men, veterans, new students, parents, what have you. And so what Trump has really done is claim that diversity programs are illegal as well. This has been demonstrably false as well.”  Jones continued with claims of fascism: “Well, I think fascism feasts on crushed hopes and dreams. And so what Trump has really been trying to do is create this culture of fear wherein corporations fear - feel as though if they pursue these diversity programs, that they're going to face some sort of litigation, or they're going to be crushed by Trump's hand.” Al Sharpton, sat next to Jones, continued the talk as he used the moment to relive the Trump New York Trial and call it the “most undiversified trial in American history, because none of us worked there.”   On Monday's Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough gave a defense of DEI programs as he made fun of those questioning DEI and said Democrats should not abandon talk of DEI and instead explain the program through the lens of the Declaration of Independence. pic.twitter.com/wEEtyGtB4g — Nick (@nspin310) May 18, 2026   Scarborough then made fun of those questioning DEI and said Democrats should explain the program through the lens of the Declaration of Independence: I always thought it was insanity that a democratic politician would be like, somebody said, “Oh, you support DEI programs.” They’d go, “I support DEI,” and everybody goes, “What's DEI?” This is such a strange foreign thing.  Like all they need to do is break it down. A diverse America. E Pluribus Unum. Out of many, one. An America that's equal. The Declaration of Independence. All are created equal. Inclusiveness. Agreeing with Scarborough, Torre claimed shareholders like diversity programs because they make money, but then said, “Why even are so many white voters still supporting Donald Trump? The success of the messaging around this was clearly DEI as a slur.” To close the segment, Jones claimed the Trump Administration was “brazenly white supremacist” and proved why the world needed DEI: And there's no greater evidence of, like, the benefits of DEI than the Trump administration. As I've written previously, it's led by several men who have quite literally said the government needs to be led by white men in order to be run effectively.  If you look at the polling data, Americans, they're experiencing the most brazenly white supremacist regime in modern history, and they do not like it. (...) Time will tell if Scarborough's defense of DEI will be the future of the party messaging, but it seemed more likely that Jones’s claims of “white supremacy” would dominate. The transcript is below. Click "expand": MS NOW’s Morning Joe May 18, 2026 7:30:05 AM Eastern (...) JONATHAN LEMIRE: So, this is interesting, Ja’han, because certainly President Trump has made no secret. Loud headline, you know, loud proclamations, screaming headlines DEI has got to go.  And certainly in the federal government, we are seeing that. But the private sector far less so. Tell us more - I know you've been following this for a while - tell us more about what struck you. JA’HAN JONES: Sure, sure. So, this really does boil down what I believe to be the biggest story of Trump's second term, which is one of corporate acquiescence, prostration to Trump's illiberal, authoritarian, or absurd demands. The assault on diversity is a prime example of this.  So it rests on all sorts of lies, primarily the lie that DEI programs are harmful to white men. This has been demonstrably false. There are all sorts of programs that benefit several classes of white men, veterans, new students, parents, what have you. And so what Trump has really done is claim that diversity programs are illegal as well. This has been demonstrably false as well.  We've seen courtrooms time and again uphold corporations' rights to maintain their corporate diversity programs. What you've actually seen is Trump and his regime referring to these settlements that they've secured with corporations, in which the corporations haven't been forced to acknowledge any kind of wrongdoing. Trump has been pointing to these settlements in many cases that constitute this multimillion-dollar shakedown, where he gets millions of dollars from these corporations for who knows what, and pointing at those to say that diversity is dead, that diversity is over with.  But you're seeing, even Fox News has been forced to report, that in many cases, these corporations have just renamed their diversity programs, put them under another umbrella, under belonging, or what other kind of corporate speak you want to use to continue to uphold these programs. And so you see that Trump has been lying to the public in many cases, about the persistence of these programs and whether they still exist at these corporations. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. You know, Ja’han, what I so I came across your article last week, and it was - it's fascinating because you hear, I mean, you see all of these tech overlords kowtowing to Donald Trump. You see all these CEOs kowtowing to Donald Trump. And so you're thinking, okay, well, all of these programs that actually push diversity, equality, inclusion, you're thinking, oh, well, obviously they're all getting wiped out.  But then you, you had an attachment that showed just 99, 100 percent of shareholders voting down shareholder initiatives that would strike down these diversity and inclusion and equity laws. And it wasn't like a 51-49 vote,  JONES: No. Not at all. SCARBOROUGH: Diversity, equality, inclusion is like getting an A plus plus with shareholders. Like it was this - And again, I wanted you to come on because I was shocked. I mean, I follow the news every day. I read your story on MS NOW’s website, and I was shocked by the overwhelming support among shareholders for diversity, for equality, for inclusion. Talk about that. JONES: Yes. Well, I think fascism feasts on crushed hopes and dreams. And so what Trump has really been trying to do is create this culture of fear wherein corporations fear - feel as though if they pursue these diversity programs, that they're going to face some sort of litigation, or they're going to be crushed by Trump's hand.  But really, like you just mentioned, I want to give credit to people like Nancy Levine-Stearns and her platform “Impactivize” that covers, you know, diversity and its persistence at these corporations.  She's been the one who's been talking about these shareholder votes that have been resoundingly in favor of diversity. And this is not because corporations of, you know, have this sense of duty to benefit they're marginalized, you know, employees. These have been demonstrably beneficial for these corporations. And that's why they have a benefit or see a benefit in maintaining these DEI programs, not because they're doing it out of a favor to their black and brown, you know, employees. AL SHARPTON: John, I was very impressed by what you wrote. The fact is, what you just said is that a lot of the CEOs I've met with, when Trump came out with this, as in my capacity with National Action Network, were saying, these people deliver.  And what people miss is that DEI, as a term, came out of the George Floyd movement, which all of us were involved in. We never called it DEI. We called it fairness. So, what you've uncovered here, which I think Joe emphasized, which is important, these companies have been doing this because they had a commitment to their consumer base.  Talk about how many of them said, we can call it whatever name you want to call it, we're going to be accountable to the people that buy our product or support us, and those that are bowing to Trump.  And by the way, Trump's diversity record in New York, if you go through the Trump Organization - well, let's put it this way. With all his trials, you never saw black witness because they didn't work in the Trump Organization. Nobody - You talk about the most undiversified trial in American history was the trials of Donald Trump, because none of us worked there. So, nobody was surprised at his position. But talk about how people were saying, we are not going to change this policy because it works for us. If people can deliver for us and those that change their policies, what happens if Congress changes and they start getting called before Congress committees and all, and have to explain, why did you flip on something? JONES: Right, right. Well, study after study has proven that diversity programs benefit the corporations that house them. It brings in more customers. As you said, we live in a diverse world. So, Trump has not been able to get corporations to abandon their prioritization of a diverse consumer base. These things that are going to allow these corporations to exist going on into the future.  So, it's very interesting that Trump, for all of his threats and all of his intimidation, has not been able to scare corporations off of the, you know, DEI initiative because that really does support their bottom line. If they abandon that, they're going to see their businesses crater. And I think a lot of these corporate executives know that even when they do things to cow, to Trump, they give him and his administration millions of dollars. They're still remaining committed to DEI. Like I said, even if these are under different umbrellas, different names, because they know that it is essential to their success going forward. SCARBOROUGH: Well, you know, Pablo, we were talking a second ago in the last segment about how badly Democrats are doing. When you look at, you know, their overall branding.  I always thought it was insanity that a Democratic politician would be like, somebody said, “Oh, you support DEI programs.” They’d go, “I support DEI,” and everybody goes, “What's DEI?” This is such a strange foreign thing.  Like all they need to do is break it down. A diverse America. E Pluribus Unum. Out of many, one. An America that's equal. The Declaration of Independence. All are created equal. Inclusiveness. And I love what Ja’han is saying and what Rev’s saying. This isn't - CEOs aren't doing this to make people feel good. They're doing this to make money. Being inclusive -  PABLO TORRE: That’s it. SCARBOROUGH: - that keeps -  you don't want a board of the same people you want. You don't want to have cultural blinders on. You want to have a diversity of thought, a diversity of background that avoids groupthink.  It's really not hard for Democrats to explain on the campaign trail. Yes, we are for, like, the motto of the United States, out of many, you know, one. We are for the Declaration of Independence. Equality. All men and women are created equal. We are for being inclusive, so we don't have like 16th century groupthink in the 21st century. This isn't hard, is it? TORRE: There's a real open lane to the hoop here for us. A layup is available if we wish to take it.  And I think it's around the premise that you mentioned, which is that this is done for self-interest. If you are selfishly trying to profit, having a diverse. I mean, it almost feels insane to have to spell it out. You feel stupid, but there is an opportunity to spell it out.  And look, let's be real, when we talk about the resiliency on some level of: Why even are so many white voters still supporting Donald Trump? The success of the messaging around this was clearly DEI as a slur. DEI as this thing that was a euphemism to speak out against some fundamental resentment that felt like, wait a minute, these people are getting advantages at our cost.  And yet, if there's an ability to take what this data is suggesting and say, wait a minute, we could say some stuff that maybe was radical in the 60s, but now feel something like, wait a minute, I thought we litigated this already. It feels like there's a real opportunity there. (...) 7:40:30 AM Eastern JONES: And there's no greater evidence of, like, the benefits of DEI than the Trump administration. As I've written previously, it's led by several men who have quite literally said the government needs to be led by white men in order to be run effectively.  If you look at the polling data, Americans, they're experiencing the most brazenly white supremacist regime in modern history, and they do not like it. So, it's time for them to start, you know, putting two and two together. This is both a white supremacist regime and a completely inept regime. These things are not detached from one another. And I think Americans are increasingly being awakened to that reality. (...)

“Denying members of the State Election Board access to the Election Night Reporting Room is outrageous,” Georgia Republican Party Chairman Josh McKoon said, reacting to news of how the election results of this week’s primary election will be aggregated. “BREAKING: Georgia’s 2026 election results will be aggregated on Election Night by the secretary of state from a ‘secret emergency bunker’ which is off-limits to candidates, the public and even to the State Election Board, which has requested access,” RealClearInvestigations Senior Reporter Paul Sperry reported Monday. State law specifically prohibits such secrecy, Sperry notes, citing O.C.G.A. § 21-2-406, which requires that “conducting of primaries and elections held under this chapter shall perform their duties in public.” “Republican and Democrat SEC (State Election Board) members alike must have full access to observe every step of the tabulation and reporting process on Election Day and throughout election night,” Chairman McKoon wrote in a statement demanding that Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger reverse the decision to ban oversight of the vote aggregation. “If there’s nothing to hide — you hide nothing,” a sitting member of the State Election Board and Georgia GOP First Vice Chair Salleigh Grubbs wrote in a X.com post urging Georgians to contact the secretary of state’s office and demand observer access. Adding to the controversy, Secretary Raffensperger is overseeing a primary election that he is a candidate in, since he is campaigning to be the state’s next governor. The room where the votes will be aggregated is known as “the bunker” because of its underground, undisclosed location, The Federalist explains: “The secretary of state’s secure, centralized Election Night Reporting Room — known in Georgia election circles as ‘the Bunker’ — is an underground facility on the east side of Atlanta where votes from Georgia’s 159 counties are aggregated in real time and statewide results are prepared for public release. On election nights, a small team of SOS (Secretary of State) staff monitors the process in a conference-room-style setting as final numbers roll in.” Additionally, video evidence belies claims by Raffensperger’s office that public oversight is not allowed in the bunker, The Federalist reports: “While the secretary of state’s office maintains that the facility is not a site for public oversight, video from the April 15, 2026, SEB meeting reveals that officials have granted selective access to it. The recording shows Chairman John Fervier stating, on the record, that he has previously been invited into the Bunker by the secretary of state’s office and that he accepted the invitation. The rest of the board was not invited.”

EXCLUSIVE: The Big Four News Apps follow a predictable script: elevate articles from left-leaning outlets, suppress their right-leaning counterparts, while giving prime real estate to some of the most radical news outlets on the left. Yahoo News typically pushes that script even further. In April, the news aggregator appeared to mask that pattern by flooding its platform with BBC content, but the underlying bias quickly resurfaced.  Yahoo News has a record of sidelining not only stories from the right but also center-leaning sources that may offer balance. Its strong preference for the most extreme outlets on the left — Salon, The New Republic and The Daily Beast — has resulted in it being scored by the Media Research Center’s Digital News Tracker as the second-most leftist of the Big Four News Apps over the November 2025 through April 2026 period. The aggregator dramatically ramped up its publication of BBC stories in April — which is still technically classified by AllSides as centrist — in an apparent bid to offset its extreme left-leaning bias rating. However, this tactic failed to deliver true balance as Yahoo News sacrificed right-leaning stories to elevate the scandal-plagued BBC, even though the British broadcaster has shifted leftward since AllSides' last evaluation in July 2024. MRC’s Findings on Yahoo News’s Top 20 Morning Editions Throughout April: After MRC exposed Yahoo News for its “bipolar” nature five months in a row, the news aggregator attempted to feign balance by boosting BBC stories 79 times in April, up from just one mention in March, even as the outlet faced accusations of systemic bias and a $10 billion defamation lawsuit.  The BBC accounted for roughly 77% of the 102 stories from center-leaning outlets featured this past month. To make room for the BBC, Yahoo News dropped articles from AllSides-rated right-leaning sources to just 5% in April, down from 15% in March. By contrast, stories from AllSides-rated left-leaning sources remained virtually untouched, inching up to 409 stories from 400 the month prior. The digital news aggregator continued to tout Salon and The New Republic, some of the most radical left-wing media outlets. MRC President David Bozell, reacting to Yahoo News’s failed attempt to conceal its bias, said: “Yahoo News is gaming the system. It hides behind a fake veneer of neutrality with BBC links while crushing conservative voices down to just 5% of coverage. At the same time, it pumps out left-wing narratives from outlets like Salon and The New Republic. Balanced reporting clearly isn’t the goal.”  Yahoo News’s Thin Attempt at Window Dressing Yahoo News’s sudden elevation of the BBC is far from organic — coming on the heels of several MRC studies that called out the aggregator’s “bipolar” nature. But the effort to manufacture balance quickly crumbled as the BBC itself drifted from the center and faced mounting scrutiny over leftist bias. The shift came after two MRC special reports that examined Yahoo News’s feeds and found the aggregator to be the most “bipolar” among competitors such as Apple News, Google News and Microsoft’s MSN. The “bipolar” label reflected Yahoo News’s routine to strip articles from center-leaning outlets from its daily top 20, leaving coverage heavily tilted to the left and only occasionally to the right. In April, however, the news aggregator sharply increased its use of the BBC, dramatically inflating the amount of “center” content appearing in its top 20 morning feeds. The BBC alone accounted for 79 of the 109 center-leaning stories featured between April 1 and April 30. That shift marked a major departure from previous months. Yahoo News featured just seven BBC stories in November, five in December, five in January, six in February and one in March. Yet during that same period, the news aggregator’s overall number of center-leaning stories remained relatively low: 36 in November, 33 in December, 21 in January, 22 in February and nine in March. The news aggregator’s April elevation of the BBC marked roughly a 1,546% increase over the average from the previous five months, with BBC coverage rising from an average of 4.8 stories to 16.5 times that level. Notably, 67 of the outlet’s 79 stories focused on British or other foreign news, many of them centered on local crime stories in the United Kingdom. The news aggregator’s reliance on the BBC could prove problematic given mounting questions surrounding the outlet’s ethics and systemic bias, concerns amplified by an internal memo that exposed its editorial failings.  After all, it is likely the outlet’s anti-Trump bias that landed the BBC in hot water, as President Donald Trump brought a $10 billion lawsuit by alleging defamation and deceptive practices against the media outlet. Separately, the news outlet is on track to lose over 1 billion pounds (over $1.1 billion) a year as British households refuse to pay its government-mandated “license fee.” MRC Free Speech America VP Dan Schneider blasted Yahoo News’s continued elevation of the BBC despite the outlet’s growing controversies: “Yahoo News has made clear that ideological alignment matters more than credibility. Despite the BBC facing lawsuits, internal scandal, allegations of systemic bias and a damaging parliamentary investigation into ethical failures, Yahoo continues to hand the outlet prime placement across its aggregator. That says far more about Yahoo News than it does about the BBC.” Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC stemmed from a doctored version of his Jan. 6, 2021, speech that the outlet aired in a 2024 documentary. The edited clip appeared to show Trump calling for violence by splicing together portions of remarks delivered more than 50 minutes apart. An internal BBC memo, written by former adviser to the BBC’s Editorial Standards Committee  Michael Prescott, cited the edit as one of many examples that suggest rampant bias at the outlet. When the memo leaked, a social media storm of criticism ensued, triggering the resignation of BBC Director General Tim Davie and BBC News CEO Deborah Turness. BBC chairman Samir Shah apologized for the edit and described it as an “error of judgment.” Trump sued in response. The case is set to head to trial in 2027. Yahoo News Sacrifices Right-Leaning Outlets to Prop-Up Scandal-Embroiled BBC Yahoo News’s attempt to manufacture balance also collapsed from another angle: the news aggregator made room for BBC stories by squeezing out stories from right-leaning outlets. In effect, even as Yahoo boosted content from an outlet still rated as centrist, the shift came largely at the expense of the right. Yahoo News’s latest editorial shift brought it more in line with competitors that routinely purge right-leaning stories from their top 20 feeds. The news aggregator promoted just 26 stories from right-leaning outlets in April, a sharp decline from 70 in March. Right-leaning sources accounted for only 5% of all stories reviewed in Yahoo News’s daily top 20 throughout April. In March, by comparison, right-leaning stories made up 15% of total coverage. Meanwhile, left-leaning stories increased from 400 in March to 409 in April, continuing Yahoo News’s long-running pattern of rewarding left-leaning outlets with prime placement in its top 20 feed. The overall ideological breakdown of Yahoo News throughout the reviewed period was as follows: Yahoo News Doubles Down on Promoting Radical Outlets Salon and The New Republic Among the 409 stories from left-leaning outlets reviewed, Yahoo News continued to promote articles from Salon and The New Republic — two outlets that openly embrace progressive ideology and routinely publish anti-Trump commentary. Salon: “JD Vance’s demon talk is lame youth outreach,” promoted April 1 (headline has since been updated). “Not just ICE: Do we need DHS?” promoted April 2.  “Running from trans rights could cost Democrats,” promoted April 5.  The New Republic: “You Can Smell It Now: The Trump Presidency Is in Total Free Fall,” promoted April 6. “No One Is Intimidated by Trump Anymore,” promoted April 6. Methodology: During the time period April 1 - 31, 2026, MRC researchers examined the top 20 stories featured on Yahoo News each day at approximately 8:30 AM ET. MRC researchers used the AllSides media bias ratings, which categorize an outlet as “left,” “lean left,” “center,” “lean right” or “right” to determine the overall bias presented by Yahoo News and analyzed the results.