Geopolitical Parallax: Beyond Walter Lippmann Just After Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.19492v1
• Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 00:39:59 GMT
• Title: Geopolitical Parallax: Beyond Walter Lippmann Just After Large Language Models
• Authors: Mehmet Can Yavuz, Humza Gohar Kabir, Aylin Özkan,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates geopolitical parallax-systematic divergence in news quality and subjectivity assessments.<n>We compare article-level embeddings from Chinese-origin (Qwen, BGE, Jina) and Western-origin (Snowflake, Granite) model families.<n>Our findings reveal consistent, non-random divergences aligned with model origin.
• Score: 0.06372261626436676
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Objectivity in journalism has long been contested, oscillating between ideals of neutral, fact-based reporting and the inevitability of subjective framing. With the advent of large language models (LLMs), these tensions are now mediated by algorithmic systems whose training data and design choices may themselves embed cultural or ideological biases. This study investigates geopolitical parallax-systematic divergence in news quality and subjectivity assessments-by comparing article-level embeddings from Chinese-origin (Qwen, BGE, Jina) and Western-origin (Snowflake, Granite) model families. We evaluate both on a human-annotated news quality benchmark spanning fifteen stylistic, informational, and affective dimensions, and on parallel corpora covering politically sensitive topics, including Palestine and reciprocal China-United States coverage. Using logistic regression probes and matched-topic evaluation, we quantify per-metric differences in predicted positive-class probabilities between model families. Our findings reveal consistent, non-random divergences aligned with model origin. In Palestine-related coverage, Western models assign higher subjectivity and positive emotion scores, while Chinese models emphasize novelty and descriptiveness. Cross-topic analysis shows asymmetries in structural quality metrics Chinese-on-US scoring notably lower in fluency, conciseness, technicality, and overall quality-contrasted by higher negative emotion scores. These patterns align with media bias theory and our distinction between semantic, emotional, and relational subjectivity, and extend LLM bias literature by showing that geopolitical framing effects persist in downstream quality assessment tasks. We conclude that LLM-based media evaluation pipelines require cultural calibration to avoid conflating content differences with model-induced bias.

Related papers

• Bridging Human and Model Perspectives: A Comparative Analysis of Political Bias Detection in News Media Using Large Language Models [0.3227658251731014]
  This study aims to present a comparative framework for evaluating the detection of political bias across human annotations and multiple language models.<n>We construct a manually annotated dataset of news articles and assess annotation consistency, bias polarity, and inter-model agreement.<n> Experimental results show that among traditional transformer-based models, RoBERTa achieves the highest alignment with human labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-18T15:58:04Z)
• Multi-Reward GRPO Fine-Tuning for De-biasing Large Language Models: A Study Based on Chinese-Context Discrimination Data [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) often exhibit implicit biases and discriminatory tendencies that reflect underlying social stereotypes.<n>This paper proposes a Multi-Reward Group Relative Policy Optimization framework to fine-tune LLMs toward ethical and bias-free behavior.<n> Experimental results demonstrate significant reductions in bias intensity and improved alignment with non-discriminatory standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-08T14:33:21Z)
• BIPOLAR: Polarization-based granular framework for LLM bias evaluation [0.0]
  This study proposes a reusable, granular, and topic-agnostic framework to evaluate polarisation-related biases in large language models.<n>Our approach combines polarisation-sensitive sentiment metrics with a synthetically generated balanced dataset of conflict-related statements.<n>As a case study, we created a synthetic dataset that focusses on the Russia-Ukraine war, and we evaluated the bias in several LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-14T20:44:19Z)
• Geopolitical biases in LLMs: what are the "good" and the "bad" countries according to contemporary language models [52.00270888041742]
  We introduce a novel dataset with neutral event descriptions and contrasting viewpoints from different countries.<n>Our findings show significant geopolitical biases, with models favoring specific national narratives.<n>Simple debiasing prompts had a limited effect on reducing these biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-07T10:45:17Z)
• Mapping Geopolitical Bias in 11 Large Language Models: A Bilingual, Dual-Framing Analysis of U.S.-China Tensions [2.8202443616982884]
  This study systematically analyzes geopolitical bias across 11 prominent Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We generated 19,712 prompts designed to detect ideological leanings in model outputs.<n>U.S.-based models predominantly favored Pro-U.S. stances, while Chinese-origin models exhibited pronounced Pro-China biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-31T03:38:17Z)
• Echoes of Power: Investigating Geopolitical Bias in US and China Large Language Models [2.1028463367241033]
  We investigate the geopolitical biases in US and Chinese Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Our findings show notable biases in both models, reflecting distinct ideological perspectives and cultural influences.<n>This study highlights the potential of LLMs to shape public discourse and underscores the importance of critically assessing AI-generated content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T19:53:10Z)
• BiasConnect: Investigating Bias Interactions in Text-to-Image Models [73.76853483463836]
  We introduce BiasConnect, a novel tool designed to analyze and quantify bias interactions in Text-to-Image models.<n>Our method provides empirical estimates that indicate how other bias dimensions shift toward or away from an ideal distribution when a given bias is modified.<n>We demonstrate the utility of BiasConnect for selecting optimal bias mitigation axes, comparing different TTI models on the dependencies they learn, and understanding the amplification of intersectional societal biases in TTI models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T19:01:41Z)
• Beyond Partisan Leaning: A Comparative Analysis of Political Bias in Large Language Models [6.549047699071195]
  This study adopts a persona-free, topic-specific approach to evaluate political behavior in large language models.<n>We analyze responses from 43 large language models developed in the U.S., Europe, China, and the Middle East.<n>Findings show most models lean center-left or left ideologically and vary in their nonpartisan engagement patterns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-21T19:42:40Z)
• Political Bias in LLMs: Unaligned Moral Values in Agent-centric Simulations [0.0]
  We investigate how personalized language models align with human responses on the Moral Foundation Theory Questionnaire.<n>We adapt open-source generative language models to different political personas and repeatedly survey these models to generate synthetic data sets.<n>Our analysis reveals that models produce inconsistent results across multiple repetitions, yielding high response variance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T08:20:41Z)
• Exploring the Jungle of Bias: Political Bias Attribution in Language Models via Dependency Analysis [86.49858739347412]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked intense debate regarding the prevalence of bias in these models and its mitigation. We propose a prompt-based method for the extraction of confounding and mediating attributes which contribute to the decision process. We find that the observed disparate treatment can at least in part be attributed to confounding and mitigating attributes and model misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T00:02:25Z)
• Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)
• CBBQ: A Chinese Bias Benchmark Dataset Curated with Human-AI Collaboration for Large Language Models [52.25049362267279]
  We present a Chinese Bias Benchmark dataset that consists of over 100K questions jointly constructed by human experts and generative language models. The testing instances in the dataset are automatically derived from 3K+ high-quality templates manually authored with stringent quality control. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the dataset in detecting model bias, with all 10 publicly available Chinese large language models exhibiting strong bias in certain categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-28T14:14:44Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.