Left vs Right
We measure how differently the left and the right talk about the same people and issues. Often it sounds like two completely different worlds.
On 41 of the 62 figures both sides covered enough to compare, the two sides aren’t disagreeing — they’re describing different people.
Tone runs −1 (hostile) to +1 (favorable); a gap past 0.5 means one side is friendly while the other is hostile.
Same Aug 3 – Aug 16 window, same people — and it cuts both ways.Shown in full below, with the other 39
“Left” and “right” mean each outlet’s editorial lean, labeled from public AllSides / Ad Fontes ratings — not our call.
The people they cover
One figure at a time: how warm each side’s coverage runs, and the story each side is actually telling — written from that side’s own airtime, with neither account written in view of the other.
Widest split in how the two sides frame them — tone and framing together.
Of the 41 figures the two sides frame sharply differently, the left covers 20 more warmly and the right covers 21 more warmly. Both are ranked together below. Both sides aired at least 3 episodes on every figure ranked here.
The left covers Ocasio-Cortez favorably; the right’s coverage runs hostile — a 1.12 tone gap.
Anything over 0.5 means one side is covering Ocasio-Cortez favorably while the other is hostile. Under 0.2, the two sides are shading the same story.
Left-leaning outlets focused on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's potential presidential ambitions for 2028 and her transparency regarding personal choices, particularly her decision to freeze her eggs. They framed her actions as empowering and relevant to broader discussions about women's rights and family planning, emphasizing her candidness and the societal pressures millennials face.
Right-leaning outlets predominantly criticized Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, framing her decision to freeze her eggs and her potential presidential run as part of a broader narrative of radicalism within the Democratic Party. They expressed skepticism about her motivations and portrayed her as attempting to distance herself from past controversial positions, often labeling her actions as manipulative or bizarre. The tone was largely critical, focusing on her perceived political baggage and the implications of her associations with the Democratic Socialists of America.
Blue = left-leaning outlets, red = right-leaning. The bar color is separate: green = favorable coverage, red = hostile.
Catchwind · Aug 3 – Aug 16 · 110 episodes · outlet leanings from AllSides / Ad Fontes
#2Stephen Miller
White House Deputy Chief of Staff
The right covers Miller favorably; the left’s coverage runs hostile — a 0.98 tone gap.
Left-leaning outlets provided critical coverage of Stephen Miller, focusing on his influence within the Trump administration and the controversial policies he supported. They emphasized his role in promoting divisive rhetoric and policies, particularly regarding immigration and public health, framing him as a significant figure in the administration's negative impact on marginalized communities.
Right-leaning outlets portrayed Stephen Miller in a positive light, emphasizing his effectiveness as a spokesperson for President Trump and his strong stance on conservative issues. They highlighted his potential future roles within the administration and expressed admiration for his policy expertise, contrasting sharply with the critical narratives found in left-leaning and centrist coverage.
Catchwind · Aug 3 – Aug 16 · 65 episodes · outlet leanings from AllSides / Ad Fontes
#3Abdul El-Sayed
US Senate nominee (D-MI)
The left covers El-Sayed favorably; the right’s coverage runs hostile — a 0.95 tone gap.
Left-leaning outlets framed Abdul El-Sayed's primary victory as a significant achievement for progressives, emphasizing his potential to be the first Muslim elected to the Senate. However, they also raised concerns about his understanding of court reform and highlighted the racist and Islamophobic attacks he faces, particularly in relation to his association with controversial figures like Hassan Piker. The tone was generally supportive but acknowledged the challenges he must navigate in the political landscape.
Right-leaning outlets characterized Abdul El-Sayed as a radical candidate closely associated with controversial figures and leftist ideologies. They emphasized his problematic record as Wayne County Health Director and framed him as a significant liability for the Democratic Party due to his perceived extremism and connections to the Democratic Socialists of America. The tone was critical, often labeling him with derogatory terms and questioning his suitability for office.
Catchwind · Aug 3 – Aug 16 · 512 episodes · outlet leanings from AllSides / Ad Fontes
#4Josh Shapiro
Pennsylvania Governor
The left covers Shapiro favorably; the right’s coverage runs critical — a 0.53 tone gap.
Left-leaning outlets framed Josh Shapiro as a significant figure in the context of the upcoming 2028 presidential election, emphasizing his potential candidacy and the support he garners as a Jewish candidate. They highlighted his electoral victory over Doug Mastriano, portraying it as a crucial moment that prevented unrest in Pennsylvania, and discussed his influence in the Democratic primaries, suggesting he plays a key role in shaping perceptions of electability.
Right-leaning outlets predominantly criticized Josh Shapiro's governance, focusing on his handling of AI technology and public health policies. They expressed skepticism about his effectiveness, particularly regarding his acceptance of funding from Amazon and his hesitance to support school choice programs. The tone was critical, emphasizing perceived failures in his leadership and questioning his priorities in relation to political contributions.
Catchwind · Aug 3 – Aug 16 · 62 episodes · outlet leanings from AllSides / Ad Fontes
#5Bernie Sanders
US Senator (I-VT)
The left covers Sanders favorably; the right’s coverage runs hostile — a 0.89 tone gap.
Left-leaning outlets focused on Bernie Sanders' comments regarding the need for a sovereign AI wealth fund to redistribute gains from technology companies. They framed Sanders as a proponent of progressive economic policies, emphasizing the inadequacy of current approaches to wealth distribution and the importance of addressing the influence of billionaires in society. The tone was critical of mainstream solutions, highlighting Sanders' vision as a necessary alternative.
Right-leaning outlets framed Bernie Sanders as a significant influence on the Democratic Party's leftward shift, often criticizing his socialist policies and their implications for the party's future. They portrayed him as a radical figure, associating him with candidates like Abdul El-Sayed and Francesca Hong, and expressed disdain for his positions on issues like AI development and economic policies. The tone was critical, emphasizing perceived failures and the dangers of his ideological influence.
Catchwind · Aug 3 – Aug 16 · 390 episodes · outlet leanings from AllSides / Ad Fontes
The issues they fight over
Step back from the names: the stories the two sides tell in opposite directions, where their tone splits hardest, and what each side gives its airtime to.
Divisive stories right now
5 active stories are being told two different ways at once. The sharpest right now: Blanche's Epstein Document Order.
Left-leaning outlets framed Todd Blanche's Epstein Document Order as part of a broader scandal, emphasizing skepticism about his commitment to transparency and accountability regarding Epstein survivors. They criticized his perceived lack of seriousness in handling the case and highlighted concerns over his qualifications for the Attorney General role, often linking his actions to Donald Trump's interests and the implications for justice.
Right-leaning outlets presented Todd Blanche's Epstein Document Order in a more procedural light, focusing on the successful navigation of political hurdles for his confirmation. They acknowledged the order from Judge Sullivan but framed it within the context of Blanche addressing concerns from Republican senators, minimizing the scandal aspect and emphasizing the resolution of issues surrounding the controversial fund.
Mostly a left-side story: 21 left-leaning episodes to 6 on the other side.
Left-leaning outlets framed Trump's Vaccine Schedule Overhaul as a dangerous and scientifically unfounded decision that undermines public health. They emphasized the backlash from health experts and organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics, highlighting concerns that the changes could lead to increased health risks for children. The tone was critical, focusing on the potential negative consequences of reducing vaccinations and promoting discredited theories linking vaccines to autism.
Right-leaning outlets generally framed Trump's Vaccine Schedule Overhaul in a supportive light, emphasizing the need for flexibility in vaccination schedules and portraying the changes as a move towards health freedom. They highlighted the alignment of the U.S. with vaccination practices in European countries and presented the executive order as a positive step for parents seeking more control over their children's health. While some coverage acknowledged criticism from health experts, the overall tone was more favorable towards Trump's approach.
An even split — 6 episodes on the left, 7 on the right.
Left-leaning outlets framed the introduction of the Citizenship Act as a continuation of harmful policies aimed at restricting rights for children of illegal immigrants. They emphasized the critical implications of the act, linking it to previous executive orders by President Trump and highlighting the potential constitutional challenges it may face. The tone was predominantly critical, focusing on the negative impact of such legislation on immigrant families.
Right-leaning outlets presented the Citizenship Act as a necessary measure to address what they perceive as the exploitation of birthright citizenship. They framed the act positively, emphasizing its alignment with President Trump's broader agenda to curb birth tourism and redefine citizenship. The coverage was supportive, focusing on the perceived need for stricter immigration policies and the implications of the current system.
Mostly a right-side story: 13 right-leaning episodes to 2 on the other side.
Left-leaning outlets emphasized skepticism towards the meeting, particularly regarding Zelensky's military strategies and Trump's relationship with Netanyahu. They highlighted tensions, with some discussions focusing on Netanyahu's controversial strategies regarding Iran and the implications for U.S.-Israel relations. The tone was critical, suggesting that the meeting may not yield positive outcomes for Ukraine or Iran.
Right-leaning outlets framed the meeting positively, focusing on the importance of dialogue among world leaders and the evolving relationship between Trump and Zelensky. They highlighted Trump's supportive stance towards Ukraine and the significance of the discussions in addressing ongoing conflicts with Iran. The tone was generally optimistic, portraying the meetings as productive and crucial for international cooperation.
An even split — 2 episodes on the left, 2 on the right.
Left-leaning outlets framed the Stevens vs. El-Sayed debate as a significant clash between progressive and moderate factions within the Democratic Party, emphasizing El-Sayed's strong performance and the implications of campaign financing. They highlighted concerns about establishment Democrats' support for Stevens and portrayed El-Sayed's victory as a potential shift towards a more progressive agenda, often criticizing mainstream media narratives that downplay his success.
Right-leaning outlets characterized the Stevens vs. El-Sayed debate as a stark ideological battle, framing El-Sayed as a radical socialist and Stevens as a moderate Democrat. They expressed skepticism about El-Sayed's appeal to broader voter demographics and criticized his connections to socialist figures. The coverage often focused on the financial backing Stevens received, portraying her as the establishment candidate and raising concerns about the implications of El-Sayed's potential nomination for the Democratic Party.
Mostly a right-side story: 85 right-leaning episodes to 19 on the other side.
Same issue, different feelings
The widest split is Healthcare: the right covers it 0.34 points colder than the left does — on a tone scale that runs −1 (hostile) to +1 (favorable). Below, the 6 issues where both sides cover the same ground and the tone splits hardest.
What each side is talking about
The right spent 2.6× more of its issue airtime on Crime & Public Safety than the left did. The left’s biggest over-index: National Security & Defense, at 2.0×. Measured as a share of each side’s own coverage, not raw episode counts.
Right-leaning outlets aired 4.0× the raw political volume of left-leaning outlets this window. Right-leaning talk radio produces far more hours than left-leaning outlets, so we compare share of each side’s coverage, not raw counts — that’s why a louder side doesn’t top every list.
Where the left spends more of its airtime
Where the right spends more of its airtime
Catchwind measures this for every candidate, issue, and outlet we track.
This page is two weeks of one cut. Bring us a name or a race and we’ll pull the same read live — the narrative each side is running, which way tone is moving, and the clips behind every claim.
See what we’d surface for your raceThis measures how outlets talk about the news — tone and framing across their audio — not whether any claim is true. It’s a mirror on the coverage, not a fact-check.