As online news consumption grows, personalized recommendation systems have become integral to digital journalism. However, these systems risk reinforcing filter bubbles and political polarization by failing to incorporate diverse perspectives. Stance detection—identifying a text’s position on a target—can help mitigate this by enabling viewpoint-aware recommendations and data-driven analyses of media bias. Yet, existing stance detection research remains largely limited to short texts and high-resource languages. To address these gaps, we introduce K-News-Stance, the first Korean dataset for article-level stance detection, comprising 2,000 news articles with article-level and 21,650 segment-level stance annotations across 47 societal issues. We also propose JoA-ICL, a Journalism-guided Agentic In-Context Learning framework that employs a language model agent to predict the stances of key structural segments (e.g., leads, quotes), which are then aggregated to infer the overall article stance. Experiments showed that JoA-ICL outperforms existing stance detection methods, highlighting the benefits of segment-level agency in capturing the overall position of long-form news articles. Two case studies further demonstrate its broader utility in promoting viewpoint diversity in news recommendations and uncovering patterns of media bias.

This paper reports on the argument mining system submitted to the ArgMining workshop 2024 for The Perspective Argument Retrieval Shared Task (Falk et al., 2024). We com- bine the strengths of a smaller Sentence BERT model and a Large Language Model: the for- mer is fine-tuned for a contrastive embedding objective and a classification objective whereas the latter is invoked to augment the query and populate the latent space with diverse relevant arguments. We conduct an ablation study on these components to find that each contributes substantially to the diversity and relevance cri- teria for the top-k retrieval of arguments from the given corpus.

Quotes are critical for establishing credibility in news articles. A direct quote enclosed in quotation marks has a strong visual appeal and is a sign of a reliable citation. Unfortunately, this journalistic practice is not strictly followed, and a quote in the headline is often “contextomized.” Such a quote uses words out of context in a way that alters the speaker’s intention so that there is no semantically matching quote in the body text. We present QuoteCSE, a contrastive learning framework that represents the embedding of news quotes based on domain-driven positive and negative samples to identify such an editorial strategy. The dataset and code are available at https://github.com/ssu-humane/contextomized-quote-contrastive.

We address an important gap in detecting political bias in news articles. Previous works that perform document classification can be influenced by the writing style of each news outlet, leading to overfitting and limited generalizability. Our approach overcomes this limitation by considering both the sentence-level semantics and the document-level rhetorical structure, resulting in a more robust and style-agnostic approach to detecting political bias in news articles. We introduce a novel multi-head hierarchical attention model that effectively encodes the structure of long documents through a diverse ensemble of attention heads. While journalism follows a formalized rhetorical structure, the writing style may vary by news outlet. We demonstrate that our method overcomes this domain dependency and outperforms previous approaches for robustness and accuracy. Further analysis and human evaluation demonstrate the ability of our model to capture common discourse structures in journalism.

This study analyzes the political slants of user comments on Korean partisan media. We built a BERT-based classifier to detect political leaning of short comments via the use of semi-unsupervised deep learning methods that produced an F1 score of 0.83. As a result of classifying 21.6K comments, we found the high presence of conservative bias on both conservative and liberal news outlets. Moreover, this study discloses an asymmetry across the partisan spectrum in that more liberals (48.0%) than conservatives (23.6%) comment not only on news stories resonating with their political perspectives but also on those challenging their viewpoints. These findings advance the current understanding of online echo chambers.