A Special Executive Magistrate extended the judicial custody of CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka by two days on Monday, with the next hearing on October 21. They were first remanded after a protest at Jantar Mantar against the Chief Election Commissioner, and the CJP alleges bail proceedings were deliberately delayed.
Why it matters: The case involves protest rights in Delhi and a campaign against the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, which affects voters across India.
This matter is before the courts or under investigation. Nazariya reports what was said and alleged; it does not decide guilt or the outcome.
Why it matters: How India's voter rolls are revised decides who can vote in 2027; the dispute has moved from the Election Commission to the courts, the streets and diplomacy.
Based on 9 articles read in full. Scores describe each article's framing, not the outlet and not whether it is accurate.
Large outlets read: 4 of 15 (Times of India, India Today, Zee News, Times Now).
Most outlets give a neutral custody update with police and CJP versions; The Week leads with the CJP's complaints about the hearing.
Why: Leads with CJP's allegations of an 'absurd' hearing and arbitrary remarks; mostly one side's voice on detention over flag unfurling, framing a civil-liberties concern. Government and prosecution response is absent.
Why: Centres on protest rights and alleged misuse of detention and court delays against dissenters, quoting the CJP's accusations; civil-liberties framing leans left, though the reporting is mostly factual.
Why: Leans on Dipke's framing of arrests as 'crimes' for waving the flag and 'illegal arrest'; civil-liberties and protest-rights angle, little police or government response beyond procedural facts.
Why: Plain court-proceedings report giving police version and CJP's delay allegations; touches civil liberties and protest rights lightly, with balanced attribution and little loaded language.
Why: Covers detention of protest leaders and bail-delay allegation; touches civil liberties and state power, with the protesters' claims given space but police version also included. Mild left tilt, short piece.
Why: Mostly a factual custody update; it notes the CJP's voter-rights and protest-site concerns and the legal team's plea, without editorialising. Faint civil-liberties and access angle only.
Why: Short custody-extension report touching civil liberties; relays the outfit's 'misuse of law' claims but mostly neutral in own voice, with no government response or strong framing.
Why: Mostly a balanced court-custody report with both police and CJP lawyers quoted. Touches protest rights and SIR voter access mildly; no loaded framing in the outlet's own voice.
Why: Short court-proceeding report with neutral wording and no loaded language; touches civil liberties and protest rights lightly, but gives no framing either way, so it sits at the centre.
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.