J&K Police registered an FIR at Gandhi Nagar police station, Jammu, under the Official Secrets Act and the BNS against an Army officer's wife. Officials allege she shared information with foreign intelligence operatives, some reportedly China-linked; she has not been arrested, and sources say the preliminary inquiry has not established that sensitive information was shared.
Why it matters: The case touches on military security, foreign intelligence reach and the use of AI tools for research, all of which concern Indian readers.
This matter is before the courts or under investigation. Nazariya reports what was said and alleged; it does not decide guilt or the outcome.
Based on 10 articles read in full. Scores describe each article's framing, not the outlet and not whether it is accurate.
Large outlets read: 8 of 15 (Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu, India Today, Aaj Tak, Zee News, ABP, Dainik Bhaskar).
Outlets agree on the basic facts; they differ on emphasis, with some stressing that no sharing is established and others detailing officials' claims about AI-assisted papers and China links.
No real disagreement between sides in this coverage.
Why: Plain police-sourced espionage case report touching security; includes caveat that no sensitive information was established as shared. No loaded language, so only a slight security-lean.
Why: Plain report of a security case based on police and official sources. It carries the allegation and notes the preliminary inquiry has not established any sharing, with no loaded framing.
Why: Security-case report relying on police and unnamed sources; hawkish espionage and China framing touches national security, but wording is mostly factual with no editorialising, so mild right lean.
Why: Plain police-sourced report on a security case; notes no sensitive sharing established yet. Touches security lightly with no loaded framing, so near centre.
Why: Security-focused espionage report relying on officials' claims, with no defence voice and no critique of state power; hawkish national-security framing, but factual tone and no loaded language.
Why: Security-focused crime report relying on a police source, with a China-linked espionage frame and tough penalties stressed; no loaded language, and it notes allegations are unproven, so only mildly right-leaning.
Why: Security-and-espionage story relayed almost wholly through officials; hawkish national-security framing with little scrutiny of the claims, though wording is restrained and attributed, so the score is mildly right.
Why: Security-agency framing of a China espionage suspicion, relying on officials' claims; includes the woman's denial and notes no arrest, so lean is mild and stance stays neutral.
Why: A security-case report touching on espionage and national security, but cautious wording stresses unproven allegations and avoids hawkish or anti-national framing. Only a mild security lean.
Why: Security-focused espionage probe relayed from sources and police action, with caveats that claims are unproven. Mild security framing, no loaded language or critique of authorities.
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: [name to be added before launch]. Grievance officer under the IT Rules, 2021: [name and contact to be added before launch]. Complaints are acknowledged within 24 hours and resolved within 15 days.
[Who owns and funds Nazariya, to be published before launch]. Nazariya will list every funder and will not accept money from any political party.
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 email to be added before launch].
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.