To give one example from the Guardian, which has really debased itself over Corbyn. A short while after his election they reported a poll showing he was quite a lot less popular than Cameron - ignoring the fact that Cameron wasn't going to be standing at the next election, whatever happened, so he wasn't going to be the person Corbyn had to beat. That was the result they used in their headline. Further down they mentioned that Osbourne, at the time the favourite to succeed Cameron, was only three points more popular than Corbyn, who was supposed to be 'unelectable'. Choosing to highlight one finding rather than another is how they expressed their bias. Pick the bit of the story that makes Corbyn look bad and a lost cause.
To give one example from the Guardian, which has really debased itself over Corbyn. A short while after his election they reported a poll showing he was quite a lot less popular than Cameron - ignoring the fact that Cameron wasn't going to be standing at the next election, whatever happened, so he wasn't going to be the person Corbyn had to beat. That was the result they used in their headline. Further down they mentioned that Osbourne, at the time the favourite to succeed Cameron, was only three points more popular than Corbyn, who was supposed to be 'unelectable'. Choosing to highlight one finding rather than another is how they expressed their bias. Pick the bit of the story that makes Corbyn look bad and a lost cause.