Latest: Activist moves Madhya Pradesh High Court seeking CBI probe into Kuno cheetah cub's death
The Union Environment Ministry has deputed a three-member central team, with officials of the NTCA and Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, to probe the death of a 19-month-old male cheetah, KNG22, from Kuno. The cheetah was found injured outside the park on October 25 and died on October 27 after five firearm pellets were recovered in surgery in Jabalpur.
Activist Ajay Dubey has approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court seeking a CBI probe, as reported by one outlet. State wildlife officials told another outlet it could be self-defence after mistaking the cub for a leopard but poaching is not ruled out, and Opposition leader Umang Singhar has questioned Project Cheetah and the state government. Summary updated 29 Oct, 06:56 IST
Why it matters: The death raises questions about the safety of cheetahs under Project Cheetah, a high-profile national wildlife programme, once they leave the protected park area.
Winding down: no new coverage since 29 Oct. It will be archived on 5 Nov unless new coverage appears.
This matter is before the courts or under investigation. Nazariya reports what was said and alleged; it does not decide guilt or the outcome.
New developments are added here, newest first. When the headline, summary or other sections change, the earlier version is kept under “See earlier version”.
Headline before this update: Centre probes Kuno cheetah's pellet death; state cites possible mistaken identity
Summary before this update: The Union Environment Ministry has deputed a three-member central team, with an NTCA Inspector General and Wildlife Crime Control Bureau officials, to probe the death of a 19-month-old male cheetah, KNG22, from Kuno. The cheetah was found injured outside the park on October 25 and died on October 27 after five firearm pellets were recovered in surgery in Jabalpur. The team, sent to Madhya Pradesh on October 28, will also review security and monitoring. State wildlife officials told one outlet it could be self-defence after mistaking the cub for a leopard but poaching is not ruled out. Madhya Pradesh Leader of Opposition Umang Singhar has questioned Project Cheetah and the state's BJP government, as reported by Aaj Tak.
Note before this update: All ten outlets report the ministry's account in neutral terms and differ mainly in detail: one carries the state's mistaken-identity theory, one a second injured cub, and one the Opposition's criticism.
“What's missing” before this update:
Based on 11 articles read in full. Scores describe each article's framing, not the outlet and not whether it is accurate.
Large outlets read: 6 of 15 (Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu, Indian Express, Aaj Tak, Republic).
Most outlets report the ministry's account in neutral terms and differ mainly in detail: one carries the state's mistaken-identity theory, one a second injured cub, and two the Opposition's criticism, one of them also the demand for a CBI probe.
No real disagreement between sides in this coverage.
Why: Plain report of a ministry announcement on a wildlife death probe; no religion, social justice or statism angle, and no praise or criticism of government in the outlet's own voice.
Why: Plain report of a wildlife death and the Centre's investigation, relayed mostly from a ministry statement. No religion, social justice or statism angle, and no loaded wording.
Why: Reports a wildlife protection incident and the government's investigation response. No religion, social justice or statism angle; tone is plain and factual, so non-ideological.
Why: Plain report of a ministry statement on a wildlife death probe; no religion, social justice or statism angle, and no praise or criticism of the government in the outlet's own voice.
Why: Plain report of a wildlife death and the official investigation; no religion, social justice or statist framing, and no praise or criticism of the government.
Why: Reports a wildlife crime probe and ministry response with no religion, identity, social justice or statism angle; neutral official-action reporting, so not ideological.
Why: A plain report of a wildlife crime probe and an official response, with no religion, social justice or statism angle, and no framing or criticism of any government.
Why: Wildlife-conservation incident report with no religion, identity, social-justice or statist framing; relays official statements and probes neutrally without praise or criticism of either government.
Why: Plain report of a central probe into a cheetah death; no religion, social justice or statism angle, and no praise or criticism of government in the outlet's own voice.
Why: Wildlife conservation story on a cheetah's death and the probes. It touches no religion, social justice or statism dimension. Questions on monitoring are raised, but the tone stays balanced.
Why: Wildlife protection and probe story with no religion, identity, social-justice or economic-policy angle; balanced mix of activist, opposition and official voices.
Critical, Neutral or Supportive, scored separately. It refers to the Union government unless the story is about a state. On the spectrum strip, each dot is an article: its position is the ideology score and its colour is the stance.
If an article would score differently with the parties' roles reversed, that signal is partisanship. It goes into the stance tag, not the ideology score.
High, Medium or Low, based on how much of the article was read, how many clear signals it has, and whether they agree.
Stories with fewer than five articles are marked. A blindspot is a contested story where we found coverage from only one side.
Articles that touch none of the three dimensions, such as a car launch or a match report, carry no ideology score.
This prototype is refreshed by hand (last on 17 Oct, 03:00 IST). At launch:
| Wires and the top 20 outlets | checked every 5 minutes |
| All other outlets | checked every 15 minutes |
| New story | goes up at 3 articles from 2 or more outlets, marked Limited coverage |
| Live stories | new articles added every 15 minutes; summary rewritten at most hourly |
| Home page order | every 15 minutes |
New facts go into a dated update log at the top of the story. New articles carry an “Added” tag. If a note or list changes, the earlier version stays viewable.
A story is Live while coverage arrives, Winding down after about 2 days without new coverage, and Archived after about 7. Nothing is deleted: links never change, archived scores are frozen, and stories stay on their issue pages and in search.
NDTV, India Today, Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu, Indian Express, News18, ABP, Times Now and Mint block the reader used for this prototype, so their articles are missing. Each story shows how many of India’s 15 largest outlets we read. The launch pipeline will read outlets’ public feeds, TV transcripts and Hindi articles.
Editor-in-charge: S. Kalra, editor@thenazariya.com. The editor-in-charge sets Nazariya's editorial rules, reviews the AI desks' daily decisions, and is responsible for everything we publish.
How we work: AI reads and scores every article against our published rubric; an AI standards desk checks accuracy and fairness; people set the rules, review decisions and handle complaints.
Grievance officer under the IT Rules, 2021: to be confirmed (based in India). Until then, write to grievance@thenazariya.com. Complaints are acknowledged within 24 hours and resolved within 15 days. To report a factual error: corrections@thenazariya.com. Other questions: support@thenazariya.com.
Ownership: Nazariya is independently owned by S. Kalra, an Indian citizen.
Funding: Nazariya is currently funded entirely by its founder. It carries no advertising and takes no money from any political party, government or party-linked organisation. In future it will be supported by optional reader memberships. Any other funder, grant or investor will be listed here, with the amount and date.
Independence: No owner, funder or member can change a story, a score or a correction. Scores follow the published rubric, and anyone can appeal them.
Anyone, including the outlet that published an article, can appeal a score: tap any score on a story page, then "Appeal this score" to write to the editor. Outlets can also dispute a summary. The editor reviews every appeal, and any change is recorded below. Appeals: appeals@thenazariya.com.
No detail that could identify a child or a survivor of sexual violence (Juvenile Justice Act, POCSO, BNS section 72). Court cases are reported as what was said and alleged. No analysis of a poll in the 48 hours before voting there (Representation of the People Act, section 126). Press Council and NBDSA norms on communal incidents.