Rahul Gandhi, in an open letter to employees, opposed the Cabinet-approved sale of a 60.72% stake in IDBI Bank to Canada's Fairfax and said reservation would end. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and DIPAM said due process was followed and the reserve price was not changed.
Why it matters: IDBI is a bank with public and LIC ownership, so the sale touches employees, depositors, reservation in public-sector jobs and the Centre's disinvestment policy.
Based on 6 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 (Hindustan Times, The Hindu, Aaj Tak, ABP).
Critical outlets lead with Gandhi's letter and give DIPAM's reply briefly, the neutral outlet balances both sides, and the supportive outlet leans on Sitharaman's rebuttal.
Why: Gives Gandhi's pro-public-sector, reservation-protection arguments plus Sitharaman's rebuttal and government NPA data; touches statism and social justice, leaning left through the quoted frames, but balanced.
Why: Reports Rahul Gandhi's pro-public-sector, pro-reservation, pro-employee case against bank sale; the government's DIPAM rebuttal appears, but the opposition framing dominates space and headline.
Why: Mostly relays Gandhi's pro-public-sector, pro-reservation, anti-privatisation argument, with only a brief DIPAM clarification. Leans left on statism and social justice; no balancing voices from employees or the government beyond DIPAM.
Why: Frames privatisation as a threat to public ownership, SC/ST/OBC reservation and employee protections; leads with Gandhi's opposition, with DIPAM's rebuttal given later and less space.
Why: Mostly relays Gandhi's letter opposing privatisation: defends public sector, employee rights and SC/ST/OBC reservations. DIPAM's response is included, but the opposition voice dominates. Statism and social justice both lean left.
Why: Privatisation of a public-sector bank defended as market-led reform; Congress-era banking attacked. Space goes mostly to Sitharaman's rebuttal, and Rahul Gandhi's welfare-and-employees critique is brief, so the framing leans pro-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.
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.