Credibility Analysis System
“D’ye ken?” — broad Scots for “do you know?” It’s the question every analysis answers.
Deyeken extracts every claim from an analysis, gathers supporting and opposing evidence, and produces a transparent credibility score — putting the reader back in control.
~2–11 MINUTES · ~$0.10–$0.85 PER ANALYSIS · PRE-BETA
Investigative News
Solid67 ±2The Hill's investigative account of Congressional surveillance oversight is well-sourced and fact-checked, but incompletely frames the underlying technical and policy debate.
Analysis of an article by in · Moderate
News Report
Solid74 ±2Newsweek's report on Senate oversight of Flock Safety's license plate readers is well-sourced and largely accurate, but omits Flock's substantive defense against documented misuse allegations.
Analysis of an article by in · Moderate
Investigative News
Solid68 ±3Mother Jones documents real Flock misuse cases with strong sourcing, but omits law enforcement's audit-sufficiency defense and leaves readers unable to assess whether misconduct is uniquely systemic to Flock or baseline across ALPR platforms.
Analysis of an article by in · Moderate
Investigative News Reporting
Mixed58 ±2InvestigateTV's investigation rests on solid sourcing and raises real oversight gaps, but omits recent Flock safeguards and understates the scale of documented misuse.
Analysis of an article by in · Moderate
Investigative News Report
Solid71 ±3CNN's investigative report on police misuse of Flock systems is well-sourced and evidence-based, but underexplores law-enforcement defenses and leaves key scope questions unresolved.
Analysis of an article by in · Credible
Investigative News
Solid67 ±3CNN's investigation documents real misuse cases with credible sourcing, but leaves readers unable to weigh whether Flock's problems are widespread or exceptional.
Analysis of an article by in · Credible
News Reporting
Strong81 ±2BBC report on AI self-regulation debate is well-sourced and accurate, but omits whether liability law actually incentivizes safety and historical context from other tech sectors.
Analysis of an article by in · Credible
News Analysis
Solid72 ±3Guardian article is well-sourced on expert warnings but obscures deep disagreement on risk magnitude and lacks historical context to judge if this represents consensus shift.
Analysis of an article by in · Credible
News Report
Solid68 ±3CNBC's report on AI safety concerns and researcher resignations is well-sourced and largely verified, but omits substantive company defense and treats extinction-risk estimates as settled fact rather than speculative.
Analysis of an article by in · Credible
News Report
Solid68 ±3Yahoo's report on Altman's AI warnings is well-sourced in its core claims but substantially incomplete on competing arguments and contested assumptions.
Analysis of an article by in · Moderate
Investigative News Analysis
Solid62 ±3Well-sourced investigation with credible warnings, but significantly understates expert disagreement on extinction probability and doesn't disclose that an AI rated its own existential risk.
Analysis of an article by in · Moderate
News Interview And Analysis
Solid65 ±3Wired's interview with Vatican AI advisor is well-sourced on Benanti's claims but significantly underreports counterarguments and regulatory complexity.
Analysis of an article by in · Credible
The Approach
Deyeken assesses the credibility of the evidentiary record across three weighted axes — source credibility, evidence alignment, and completeness. It surfaces supporting and opposing evidence so you can judge for yourself.