Language: RU EN

Comparison

Winner: Source B is less manipulative

Source B appears less manipulative than Source A for this narrative.

Topics

Instant verdict

Less biased source: Source B
More emotional framing: Source B
More one-sided framing: Source A
Weaker evidence quality: Source A
More manipulative overall: Source A

Narrative conflict

Source A main narrative

Flo Clifford27 April 2026 05:00Paula Radcliffe: 'This will reverberate around the world'Paula Radcliffe, who stills holds the course record for the women’s London Marathon, said: “This will reverberate around…

Source B main narrative

That's almost 14 minutes faster than when she ran in 2022.

Conflict summary

Stance contrast: Flo Clifford27 April 2026 05:00Paula Radcliffe: 'This will reverberate around the world'Paula Radcliffe, who stills holds the course record for the women’s London Marathon, said: “This will reverberate around… Alternative framing: That's almost 14 minutes faster than when she ran in 2022.

Source A stance

Flo Clifford27 April 2026 05:00Paula Radcliffe: 'This will reverberate around the world'Paula Radcliffe, who stills holds the course record for the women’s London Marathon, said: “This will reverberate around…

Stance confidence: 77%

Source B stance

That's almost 14 minutes faster than when she ran in 2022.

Stance confidence: 53%

Central stance contrast

Stance contrast: Flo Clifford27 April 2026 05:00Paula Radcliffe: 'This will reverberate around the world'Paula Radcliffe, who stills holds the course record for the women’s London Marathon, said: “This will reverberate around… Alternative framing: That's almost 14 minutes faster than when she ran in 2022.

Why this pair fits comparison

  • Candidate type: Closest similar
  • Comparison quality: 46%
  • Event overlap score: 17%
  • Contrast score: 73%
  • Contrast strength: Weak but valid compare
  • Stance contrast strength: High
  • Event overlap: Event overlap is weak. Overlap is inferred from broader contextual signals.
  • Contrast signal: Interpretive contrast is visible, but event linkage is moderate: verify against primary sources.
  • Why conflict is limited: Some contrast exists, but event linkage is weak: this is closer to an adjacent angle than a strong battle pair.
  • Stronger comparison suggestion: This direct pair is weak: open conflict-mode similar search to pick a stronger contrast angle.
  • Use stronger suggestion

Key claims and evidence

Key claims in source A

  • Flo Clifford27 April 2026 05:00Paula Radcliffe: 'This will reverberate around the world'Paula Radcliffe, who stills holds the course record for the women’s London Marathon, said: “This will reverberate around the world.
  • Follow live updates from the 2026 London Marathon in our blog belowLondon Marathon race director: 'Sport and history in the making'London Marathon race director Hugh Brasher said: “Nobody thought that a sub-two-hour mar…
  • He said he came into the marathon knowing sub-2:00:00 was possible.
  • His half-marathon personal best in 58:05, and only 63 men have ever run a half as quickly as he completed his second half today.(London Marathon )Flo Clifford27 April 2026 01:00Steve Cram: 'A privilege' to watch Sawe's…

Key claims in source B

  • That's almost 14 minutes faster than when she ran in 2022.
  • Although his previous PB is unknown, That didn't stop him running 05:51:53.
  • Harry Clark, everyone’s favourite Traitor, ran the 2026 London Marathon in a time of 04:38:34.
  • Below is the current list of famous faces who are running the 2026 London Marathon, along with their 2026 London Marathon finish times (plus any previous best running times)Celebrities who ran the London Marathon 2026An…

Text evidence

Evidence from source A

  • key claim
    Flo Clifford27 April 2026 05:00Paula Radcliffe: 'This will reverberate around the world'Paula Radcliffe, who stills holds the course record for the women’s London Marathon, said: “This will…

    A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.

  • key claim
    His half-marathon personal best in 58:05, and only 63 men have ever run a half as quickly as he completed his second half today.(London Marathon )Flo Clifford27 April 2026 01:00Steve Cram:…

    A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.

  • causal claim
    I saw the time and I was so excited to see running a world record today.“ I think I was well prepared because coming to London for the second time was so important to me, and that's why.

    Cause-effect claim shaping how events are explained.

Evidence from source B

  • key claim
    Below is the current list of famous faces who are running the 2026 London Marathon, along with their 2026 London Marathon finish times (plus any previous best running times)Celebrities who…

    A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.

  • key claim
    That's almost 14 minutes faster than when she ran in 2022.

    A key claim that anchors the narrative framing.

  • omission candidate
    Flo Clifford27 April 2026 05:00Paula Radcliffe: 'This will reverberate around the world'Paula Radcliffe, who stills holds the course record for the women’s London Marathon, said: “This will…

    Possible context omission: Source B gives less emphasis to political decision-making context than Source A.

Bias/manipulation evidence

No concise text evidence snippets were extracted for this section yet.

How score signals are formed

Bias score signal Bias signal combines framing pressure, emotional wording, selective emphasis, and one-sided narrative markers.
Emotionality signal Emotionality rises when evidence contains emotionally loaded wording and evaluative labels.
One-sidedness signal One-sidedness rises when one frame dominates and alternative interpretations are weakly represented.
Evidence strength signal Evidence strength rises with concrete claims, attributed statements, and verifiable contextual support.

Source A

35%

emotionality: 29 · one-sidedness: 35

Detected in Source A
Emotional reasoning

Source B

28%

emotionality: 31 · one-sidedness: 30

Detected in Source B
framing effect

Metrics

Bias score Source A: 35 · Source B: 28
Emotionality Source A: 29 · Source B: 31
One-sidedness Source A: 35 · Source B: 30
Evidence strength Source A: 64 · Source B: 70

Framing differences

Possible omitted/downplayed context

Related comparisons