Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Appears moderately imbalanced

Article summary:

1. This article examines the two types of accountability mechanisms: question-and-answer accountability and sanction-based accountability, and explains their development and limitations.

2. The article argues that the logic of sanction-based accountability promotes transparency in government processes, but fails to eliminate ineffective or irresponsible behaviors.

3. The article suggests that trust should be used to reconstruct the accountability system so that government agencies can actively fulfill their responsibilities.

Article analysis:

The article is generally reliable and trustworthy, as it provides a comprehensive overview of the two types of accountability mechanisms, their development and limitations. It also offers an insightful analysis on how trust can be used to reconstruct the accountability system so that government agencies can actively fulfill their responsibilities. However, there are some potential biases in the article which need to be noted. For example, it does not present both sides equally when discussing sanctions-based accountability; instead, it focuses more on its limitations rather than its benefits. Additionally, there is a lack of evidence for some of the claims made in the article; for instance, there is no evidence provided to support the claim that sanctions-based accountability has failed to eliminate ineffective or irresponsible behaviors. Furthermore, there are some missing points of consideration which could have been explored further; for example, how different countries have implemented different forms of accountability systems and what effects they have had on public administration. Finally, there is a lack of counterarguments presented in the article; while it does provide an argument for why trust should be used to reconstruct the accountability system, it does not explore any potential counterarguments which could challenge this argument.