A couple and their three children were found dead at their Greater Noida home on Saturday morning, after reportedly eating noodles the night before. Police suspect food poisoning but say the exact cause is unknown until post-mortem and forensic results arrive.
Why it matters: A suspected case of food poisoning that killed a whole family raises questions about food safety and how quickly such cases get investigated in the Delhi-NCR region.
A child is involved in this story. Under the Juvenile Justice Act, Nazariya does not publish any detail that could identify a child, and leaves out unverified claims about the child.
Based on 18 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 (Hindustan Times, Aaj Tak, Republic, Zee News, ABP, Times Now).
All three outlets report the same police account; they differ mainly in emphasis, such as the MLA's role, the food in question and background on past contamination deaths.
No real disagreement between sides in this coverage.
Why: A local tragedy report on suspected food poisoning with no religion, social justice or statist angle; it relays police and an MLA's statements without taking a side.
Why: A crime and public-health incident report with no engagement with religion, social justice or statism; sourcing is police and a local MLA, with no criticism or praise of government.
Why: Crime report on a family's deaths with no policy, religion, social justice or statism angle; it relays police suspicions and neighbours' accounts without framing.
Why: A crime/accident report on suspected food poisoning with no ideological dimension. Police and a local MLA are quoted, with no framing for or against any government.
Why: A local crime and tragedy report on a family's deaths, with no policy, religion, social-justice or statism angle. It reports police, neighbours and food department views without judging any government.
Why: A crime and incident report about five family deaths with no religion, security, social justice or economic policy angle. Cautious, factual wording and no government framing.
Why: A crime and investigation report on a family's deaths with no religion, security-policy, social-justice or economic-policy angle, so it is not ideological. No government criticism or praise.
Why: Local crime/accident report about a family's suspicious deaths in Greater Noida; no policy, identity or government angle, so not ideological and neutral.
Why: A local crime and food-safety report on a family's deaths. It touches no religion, social justice or statism dimension, and carries no framing of government.
Why: A crime report on a family's deaths and a property dispute, with no religion, security-policy, social-justice or statism angle, and no government framing.
Why: A local crime report on a family's deaths and an FIR against relatives. It touches no religion, social justice or statism dimension, so it is not ideological.
Why: A crime report on a family's deaths and a property dispute; it has no religion, social-justice or statism angle and no government framing.
Why: A crime report on a family's deaths and a property dispute, with no religion, security, social justice or state-policy angle. Police sources are used and no government stance is taken.
Why: A crime report on a family's deaths and a property feud, with no religion, security-policy, social justice or statism angle, so it is not ideological.
Why: A local crime report on a family's deaths and a property dispute. It touches no religion, social justice or statism themes, and carries no government angle.
Why: A crime report on a family property dispute and suspected poisoning, with no policy, religion, social-justice or statism angle. No stance toward any government.
Why: Crime report on a family's deaths and a property dispute; no religion, social justice or statism angle, and no government criticism or praise.
Why: Local crime report on a family's deaths and arrests; no policy, religion, social justice or statism angle. Police action reported plainly, with caution about unproven poisoning claim.
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.