@inproceedings{prama-islam-2025-evaluating,
    title = "Evaluating Credibility and Political Bias in {LLM}s for News Outlets in {B}angladesh",
    author = "Prama, Tabia Tanzin  and
      Islam, Md. Saiful",
    editor = "Zhao, Jin  and
      Wang, Mingyang  and
      Liu, Zhu",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)",
    month = jul,
    year = "2025",
    address = "Vienna, Austria",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/landing_page/2025.acl-srw.42/",
    pages = "665--677",
    ISBN = "979-8-89176-254-1",
    abstract = "Large language models (LLMs) are widelyused in search engines to provide direct an-swers, while AI chatbots retrieve updated infor-mation from the web. As these systems influ-ence how billions access information, evaluat-ing the credibility of news outlets has becomecrucial. We audit nine LLMs from OpenAI,Google, and Meta to assess their ability to eval-uate the credibility and political bias of the top20 most popular news outlets in Bangladesh.While most LLMs rate the tested outlets, largermodels often refuse to rate sources due to in-sufficient information, while smaller modelsare more prone to hallucinations. We create adataset of credibility ratings and political iden-tities based on journalism experts' opinions andcompare these with LLM responses. We findstrong internal consistency in LLM credibil-ity ratings, with an average correlation coeffi-cient ({\ensuremath{\rho}}) of 0.72, but moderate alignment withexpert evaluations, with an average {\ensuremath{\rho}} of 0.45.Most LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-4o-mini, Llama 3.3,Llama-3.1-70B, Llama 3.1 8B, and Gemini 1.5Pro) in their default configurations favor theleft-leaning Bangladesh Awami League, givinghigher credibility ratings, and show misalign-ment with human experts. These findings high-light the significant role of LLMs in shapingnews and political information"
}