NazariyaEvery side of the story. You decide.
ArchivedStates· Updated 10 Oct · First reported 9 OctLimited coverage

Kerala CM Satheesan rejects ally's charge of unilateral decisions

Chief Minister V D Satheesan rejected UDF convener Adoor Prakash's complaint to the Congress high command that he takes major decisions, including two Cabinet-rank appointments for allies, without consulting the front. KPCC president Sunny Joseph backed the Chief Minister and said the AICC would handle the complaint.

Why it matters: Early strain inside Kerala's ruling UDF over how decisions are made.

Based on 4 articles read in full. Scores describe each article's framing, not the outlet and not whether it is accurate.

Large outlets read: 0 of 15. Most of India’s largest outlets, including NDTV, India Today, Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu and Indian Express, block our reader in this prototype, so their coverage is missing here. The launch pipeline reads their public feeds.

Left-leaningCentreRight-leaning
+ 4 Not ideological
CriticalNeutralSupportive
Ideology · 4 articles
Left-leaning 0Centre 0Right-leaning 0Not ideological 4
Stance · Kerala govt
Critical 2Neutral 1Supportive 1
What's missing: No article reported any response from the Congress high command to Prakash's complaint.

What everyone agrees on

  • Prakash complained to Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge on 5 October that the CM acts without consulting the UDF. 1 3
  • The trigger was Cabinet-rank posts for IUML's M K Muneer and Forward Bloc's G Devarajan. 1 3
  • Satheesan says senior leaders and the Cabinet are consulted on decisions. 2 3 4

How each side sees it

Coverage is non-ideological; views are grouped by stance toward the UDF-led Kerala government.

Critical of the Kerala govt
The CM is concentrating decisions and keeping the front's convener uninformed, while avoiding questions on his chartered flight. 1 2
Neutral
The rift is deepening, with the CM rejecting the charges and no sign of a quick resolution. 3
Supportive of the Kerala govt
Coordination in the UDF Cabinet is good, and the complaint is a matter for the AICC to handle. 4

Where they disagree

  1. Consultation: Were the appointments discussed with UDF leaders, as Satheesan says, or made without telling the convener? 1 3 4
  2. Scale: Is this a deepening rift in the ruling front, or a routine matter for the party high command? 3 4

What's missing

  • AICC response: No article reported any response or decision from the Congress high command.
  • Allies' view: No article quoted the IUML or Forward Bloc on the appointments.
  • Flight sponsor: No article identified who paid for the CM's chartered flight to Malappuram.

The articles

Critical of the Kerala govt
1 · The News MinuteConfidence: Medium
Rift in Congress: UDF convener complains to high command against CM Satheesan
This article:

Why: Background report on Prakash's 5 October complaint to Kharge. Gives only Prakash's side; no response from Satheesan.

2 · OnmanoramaConfidence: High
Satheesan pacifies Adoor, accepts Kuzhalnadan's unintentional support to reject FIRs against UDF leaders
This article:

Why: Own-voice commentary critical of the CM, such as 'perplexing refusal' on the flight row. Covers his conciliatory line to Prakash and his diary stance.

Neutral
3 · OrganiserConfidence: Medium
Keralam Congress rift deepens as CM Satheeshan rejects UDF convener Adoor Prakash's allegations of unilateral decisions
Owner: Bharat Prakashan, an RSS-affiliated publisher
This article:

Why: Reports both the charge and the CM's rebuttal; headline stresses a deepening rift, which reflects partisanship rather than ideology.

Supportive of the Kerala govt
4 · ThePrint (PTI)Confidence: High
KPCC chief backs CM Satheesan on UDF coordination
Wire copy
This article:

Why: Most space goes to the KPCC chief and CM saying coordination is good; Prakash's complaint is only summarised.

How we score

Ideology score, −10 to +10

Left-leaning (−10 to −3)
Secular-pluralist framing, minority protection, caste justice and voter access, civil liberties, an active state.
Centre (−2 to +2)
Several positions represented fairly, neutral language, reporting kept apart from opinion.
Right-leaning (+3 to +10)
Cultural nationalism, national strength and security, scepticism of group-based policy, voter-roll integrity, market-led growth.

Stance toward the government

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.

The swap test

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.

Confidence

High, Medium or Low, based on how much of the article was read, how many clear signals it has, and whether they agree.

Limited coverage and blindspots

Stories with fewer than five articles are marked. A blindspot is a contested story where we found coverage from only one side.

Not ideological

Articles that touch none of the three dimensions, such as a car launch or a match report, carry no ideology score.

How often the feed refreshes

This prototype is refreshed by hand (last on 17 Oct, 03:00 IST). At launch:

Wires and the top 20 outletschecked every 5 minutes
All other outletschecked every 15 minutes
New storygoes up at 3 articles from 2 or more outlets, marked Limited coverage
Live storiesnew articles added every 15 minutes; summary rewritten at most hourly
Home page orderevery 15 minutes

Updates are added, never rewritten

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.

Live, winding down, archived

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.

Large outlets missing

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.

Who is accountable

Editor and grievance officer

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.

Funding and ownership

[Who owns and funds Nazariya, to be published before launch]. Nazariya will list every funder and will not accept money from any political party.

Appeals

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].

Rules we follow

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.

Corrections log

  • 16 Oct · Goregaon toddler death: removed the building's name and an unverified claim about the 10-year-old's health, to protect the child's identity.
  • 16 Oct · India–US trade deal: merged two duplicate story pages into one.
  • 16 Oct · INS Mangrol: one report names the commissioning officer differently from three others; flagged in the story, not resolved.