US Vice President JD Vance said at a CBS News town hall that his wording on H-1B workers was imperfect, and that he was criticising companies and the visa system, not visa holders. India's external affairs ministry had called the description unwarranted and offensive, citing colonial connotations.
Why it matters: Indian professionals make up most approved H-1B petitions, so US rhetoric and action on the visa directly affect Indian workers and IT firms.
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 (Hindustan Times, Zee News). 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 articles are neutral in stance and report the same facts; they differ mainly in which details they add, such as pay figures, deportation risk and the share of Indian petitions.
No real disagreement between sides in this coverage.
Why: Reports Vance's clarification and India's objection with both sides quoted, in neutral wording. Touches immigration and labour lightly, with no clear ideological tilt from the outlet.
Why: Reports Vance's clarification and the MEA rebuke with both sides quoted, no editorial framing. Touches immigration and labour only lightly, so little ideological signal.
Why: Reports Vance's clarification and India's objection without editorial slant; touches immigration and national identity lightly, with no clear ideological direction in framing.
Why: Reports Vance's walk-back and India's MEA objection with both sides quoted. It is a foreign-affairs story with no clear Indian ideological framing, so it is treated as not ideological.
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.