Former President Trump’s supporters are fuming over how ABC handled last night’s debate. They claim the moderators played favorites, pouncing on Trump with rapid “fact checks,” while giving Vice President Kamala Harris a free pass on her own misleading remarks.

Of course, it’s perfectly plausible to think both Vice President Harris outperformed the former president and agree that ABC’s moderators nevertheless put their thumb on the scale. In fact, I think the moderators were biased, but that the slant went deeper than the predictably uneven “fact-checking.”

As I argued in a 2016 IEA paper, media bias can take subtle forms. There’s bias by selection — choosing to cover some topics or evidence over equally valid alternatives. There’s bias by omission — important subjects being ignored because journalists don’t find them convenient or compelling. There’s also bias by presentation — where certain viewpoints get painted in a deliberately negative or partisan light relative to others.

To call out “bias,” you first need a sense of what neutrality looks like, and that’s often pretty subjective. But in a presidential debate, there’s a solid argument that moderators should meet voters where they are—focusing on the issues and debates the public actually care about, not what the elites behind the podium think matters.

Starting from that perspective, there was some pretty blatant journalistic bias. And that bias probably tilted against President Trump.

Why? Polls consistently show that “the economy” and “the high cost of living/​inflation” are two of voters’ top three concerns, alongside immigration. Everything else barely registers. Yet ABC lumped inflation and economic conditions into one expansive opening question, followed by the moderators sitting back and allow a back-and-forth with no real substance or probing, unlike the approach the hosts took for later subjects.

In fact, when it came to economic issues, I saw all three forms of bias—selection, omission, and presentation—on display.

On selection, general economics was given roughly the same prominence as issues like abortion, even though voters consistently rank the economy as a far bigger concern than reproductive issues. That meant the candidates had to squeeze a raft of different subjects into their answers, meaning no real focus was retained on inflation, the biggest economic issue identified by voters of all.

In terms of omission, the moderators completely skipped over major economic subjects. After asking Harris if voters were better off than four years ago, they let her stumble through a response that sounded like someone trying to recite policy press releases after a stroke, and then failed to follow-up. There were no questions on what drove inflation. No mention of tax plans. And not a word on Harris’s new price control proposals, supposedly designed to tackle the cost of living.

In fact, the only economic issue the moderators decided to “drill down on” was Trump’s tariff proposals. They leaned on authority in presenting that question, pointing out that “economists say tariffs at that level push costs onto consumers.” Fair enough—that health warning about the policy is true and worth raising. But guess what else academic economists hate and think would be destructive? The rent and grocery price controls Harris has been pushing. Yet those didn’t even get a mention, let alone a cautionary note about where expert opinion stands.

Now, it’s not a given that these evident biases stemmed from overt partisan animus. It might just reflect the way the journalists themselves think about economic issues. Plus, let’s be real — Trump could have helped redirect attention to these pocketbook issues, but (baited by Harris) he instead whipsawed from one crank right wing internet rumor to another like a Tourette’s case who had skipped the meds.

Yet when it came to other policy topics, the moderators stuck with asking tough questions they thought voters wanted to hear, regardless of where the candidates led them. On economics, the biggest issue for voters, ABC dropped the ball. And considering Trump generally polls better on economic issues, this lack of focus, selective questioning, and skewed presentation most probably worked against him.