Defence Minister Rajnath Singh told the SCO heads of government meeting in Dushanbe that terrorism cannot be justified and its whole ecosystem, including financiers and safe havens, must end. Several outlets note Pakistan's deputy PM Ishaq Dar was present, and the meeting adopted a joint communiqué, the 2027 budget and an action plan for 2026-2030.
Why it matters: The remarks restate India's counter-terror line before Pakistan at a regional forum and set out India's plans for the SCO, including hosting a civilisation dialogue forum.
Based on 11 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 (Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu, Zee News, Times Now, Jagran).
Coverage broadly agrees on what Singh said. It differs mainly on how much it stresses Pakistan and military record versus trade, connectivity and civilisational cooperation.
No real disagreement between sides in this coverage.
Why: Plain report of the minister's SCO remarks on terrorism and bilateral talks; relays India's stated hawkish position without praise or criticism. Slight national-security framing, with no opposing voices.
Why: Reports the minister's hawkish no-double-standards terror stance and inclusive trade remarks, with a civilisation forum mention. Security framing leans right mildly; plain event report with no outlet praise, so Neutral.
Why: Relays hawkish security rhetoric (Operation Sindoor, Balakot, 'shelf life' of terrorists) almost entirely in the minister's voice, with a stern-warning headline and no counter-voices or Pakistan response.
Why: Relays India's hawkish anti-terror line with Pakistan largely unchallenged; includes Indian claims such as S-400 shootdowns and Pakistan 'heavy losses' as fact, no Pakistani response. Security-nationalist framing.
Why: Reports Rajnath Singh's hawkish no-double-standards line on terrorism and India's tech and self-reliance record, using only his words. This gives a mild right tilt on security, but the tone is that of a plain event report.
Why: Relays Rajnath Singh's hawkish national-security lines (Sindoor, Balakot, 'prepared for war') with no counter-voices. The headline echoes his words, and the piece is one-sided toward the government's security narrative.
Why: Relays Singh's hawkish national-security message (Sindoor, Balakot, 'shelf life' of terrorists) with no counter-voices; framing is security-first, but it is a plain report of an official event, so stance stays neutral.
Why: Hawkish national-security framing: Operation Sindoor, Balakot and surgical strikes presented as a decisive shift, with only Singh's voice and no critical or Pakistani response. Own-voice tone is approving.
Why: Hawkish national-security framing; headline says Rajnath 'told Pakistan off' in own voice, with only government voices quoted. Some economic cooperation content, but the security dimension dominates.
Why: Reports Singh's hawkish counter-terror message and India's DPI and start-up pride, mostly via his own words. Mild security-nationalist lean, no critics quoted; plain report of an official event.
Why: Plain report of a diplomatic visit and official remarks on an SCO forum, solar and climate initiatives. No contested policy or ideological framing; civilisational language is quoted from Singh, not the outlet's own.
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.