Settings
Sign in with your email or continue with Google. No password needed.
40 outlets covered itfirst report

Usually, in a story: 19% pro-government · 58% neutral · 23% critical
For 54 outlets the group comes from the measurement of headlines on shared stories over the last one to three months; for 26 outlets with few headlines it is the editors' estimate. We count who covered the story, not how.
Bright: the outlets that covered it. Faint: those that have not (so far). Only outlets with a position on the map.
The map changes every night with the opinion texts read so far. An outlet appears on an axis once it has enough positions. Figures of 28 October 2026. So far, 26 outlets on the map.
Each headline is judged only on how it presents the government, not on the outlet that wrote it. Each outlet counts once, with the stance of most of its headlines, as in the monthly measurement. The headline is judged together with its short summary. The judgement and the explanation are written by an artificial intelligence model.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
1 of its 6 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Ο υφυπουργός Εξωτερικών δηλώνει ότι οι σχέσεις «Ποτέ δεν ήταν σε καλύτερη φάση» και περιγράφει «πρωταγωνιστικό ρόλο» της Ελλάδας.
1 of its 3 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Οι διατυπώσεις «Κοινό μέτωπο» και «επισφράγισαν τους ισχυρούς δεσμούς τους» παρουσιάζουν θετικά τη συνεργασία των δύο κυβερνήσεων.
2 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Ο απολογισμός προβάλλει «ισχυρή συμμαχία», συμφωνία για εξοπλισμούς και «σαφή αμερικανική στήριξη» στα ενεργειακά σχέδια.
2 of its 8 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
1 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
4 of its 4 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Παρουσιάζει ως κυβερνητικό μειονέκτημα τη «μονοδιάστατη εξωτερική πολιτική» και την «σιωπή για τα ελληνοτουρκικά», λέγοντας ότι η Ελλάδα εμφανίζεται «ως χώρα πελάτης των ΗΠΑ».
1 of its 4 headlines on the story take this stance.
Have not covered it: Dimokratia, Documento, Efimerida ton Syntakton, Estia, Kathimerini, Nea Kriti, News 24/7, Parallaxi, Rosa, Ta Nea, To Vima.
The model's explanation: Η περίληψη παραθέτει «θερμά συγχαρητήρια» στον πρωθυπουργό και αναφέρει «πολλαπλά τα οφέλη της επίσκεψης».
The model's explanation: Αφορά τις κοινές δηλώσεις του υπουργού Εξωτερικών, αλλά αναφέρεται σε σχόλια για το Ιράν, την πρέσβη και την Ελλάδα ως «Πάροχος ασφάλειας», χωρίς αξιολόγηση κυβερνητικής επιτυχίας ή αποτυχίας.
4 of its 4 headlines on the story take this stance.
The headline's side rests on a statement or act of a foreign government or an international body, so it counts as neutral.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
2 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
The model's explanation: Ο τίτλος και η περίληψη εστιάζουν στην απάντηση του Αμερικανού υπουργού για τη «στάση των ΗΠΑ έναντι του καλωδίου», χωρίς αξιολόγηση ελληνικής κυβερνητικής πράξης.
3 of its 3 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
2 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Ο τίτλος περιγράφει το κοινό ανακοινωθέν ως προς την «αγορά στρατιωτικού υλικού» και την «ενίσχυση ενεργειακής συμμαχίας», χωρίς αξιολογική κρίση.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
2 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Ο τίτλος επικεντρώνεται στη δήλωση του Ρούμπιο ότι «Δεν θα επιτρέπαμε ποτέ ελληνοτουρκική σύγκρουση» και σε άλλα διεθνή ζητήματα, χωρίς αξιολόγηση της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης.
2 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
The headline's side rests on a statement or act of a foreign government or an international body, so it counts as neutral.
The headline's side rests on a statement or act of a foreign government or an international body, so it counts as neutral.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
The second check did not confirm the headline's side, so it counts as neutral.
2 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The headline's side rests on a statement or act of a foreign government or an international body, so it counts as neutral.
The model's explanation: Ο τίτλος και η περίληψη καταγράφουν κοινές δηλώσεις και ανακοινώσεις για «νέο μνημόνιο» και «νέους αγωγούς», χωρίς αξιολόγηση της κυβερνητικής δράσης.
The model's explanation: Ο τίτλος διατυπώνει μελλοντική πρόθεση —«θα συνεχίσουμε να προωθούμε»— και δεν παρουσιάζει ήδη επιτευχθέν όφελος.
3 of its 3 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Η συνάντηση του Ρούμπιο με τον Μητσοτάκη αναφέρεται διαδικαστικά, ενώ το μήνυμα «Πρώτα η Αμερική» και η αναφορά στους συμμάχους δεν αξιολογούν την ελληνική κυβέρνηση.
3 of its 3 headlines on the story take this stance.
The headline's side rests on a statement or act of a foreign government or an international body, so it counts as neutral.