Latest: Stay order dated October 9; next hearing after 12 weeks, one outlet reports
The Supreme Court stayed the execution of Mohammad Tanvir, one of the convicts in the 2008 Ahmedabad serial blasts, in an order dated October 9. It agreed to hear his plea against the Gujarat High Court's July 7 verdict and asked for probation officers' reports and jail conduct and psychological evaluation reports within eight weeks. One outlet reports that the next hearing is set after 12 weeks. Summary updated 19 Oct, 20:57 IST
Why it matters: The order shows how the top court handles death-penalty appeals in one of India's deadliest terror cases, with 56 people killed in 2008.
This matter is before the courts or under investigation. Nazariya reports what was said and alleged; it does not decide guilt or the outcome.
New developments are added here, newest first. When the headline, summary or other sections change, the earlier version is kept under “See earlier version”.
Summary before this update: The Supreme Court stayed the execution of Mohammad Tanvir, one of the convicts in the 2008 Ahmedabad serial blasts, and agreed to hear his plea against the Gujarat High Court's July 7 verdict. It asked Gujarat for probation officers' reports and the jail for conduct and psychological evaluation reports within eight weeks.
Note before this update: All three outlets are neutral and agree on the core facts; they differ mainly in which background details they include.
“What's missing” before this update:
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: 2 of 15 (The Hindu, Dainik Bhaskar). 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.
All four outlets are neutral and agree on the core facts; they differ mainly in which background details they include.
No real disagreement between sides in this coverage.
Why: Plain wire-style report of a court order staying an execution, with balanced recounting of the high court's reasoning. It uses no loaded framing, and the security and civil-liberties angle is handled neutrally.
Why: Plain court report on a terror case; neutral wording, mentions police claims about IM and SIMI and court-ordered compensation. Slight security framing but no loaded language or advocacy.
Why: Plain report of a court order with background from the High Court verdict. Touches terror and security but uses neutral, procedural language and no loaded framing from either side.
Why: Plain report of a court order on a terror conviction; uses court language like 'dastardly act' but adds no own-voice slant. Touches security and law mildly, balanced.
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.