Settings
Sign in with your email or continue with Google. No password needed.
16 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.
none
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
The model's explanation: Αναφέρει ότι «Ξεκινά η διαβούλευση» νομοσχεδίου του ΥΠΕΝ και περιγράφει προβλέψεις του χωρίς αξιολόγηση της κυβέρνησης.
2 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 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: Περιγράφει τις προβλέψεις του πολυνομοσχεδίου του ΥΠΕΝ, αναφέροντας «Μειώνονται οι χρεώσεις ΥΚΩ» και «υποχρεωτικά τα σταθερά τιμολόγια», χωρίς αξιολόγηση.
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.
The model's explanation does not quote words from the headline itself, so we do not show it.
Have not covered it: Apogevmatini, Capital, Documento, Efimerida ton Syntakton, Estia, Kathimerini, LamiaReport, Naftemporiki, Nea Kriti, NewsIT, Parallaxi, Parapolitika, Rosa, To Manifesto, To Vima, TVXS, Vradyni.
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: Παρουσιάζει «Τι προβλέπει το νέο νομοσχέδιο του ΥΠΕΝ» και τις αλλαγές που φέρνει, χωρίς να τις αξιολογεί.
The model's explanation: Περιγράφει τι προβλέπει το νομοσχέδιο του ΥΠΕΝ, με τις «Μειώνονται οι χρεώσεις ΥΚΩ» και «υποχρεωτικά τα σταθερά τιμολόγια», χωρίς αξιολογικό χαρακτηρισμό.
The model's explanation: Περιγράφει τις προβλέψεις του νομοσχεδίου ως «Μείωση 50% στις χρεώσεις ΥΚΩ και νέοι κανόνες για καταναλωτές και παρόχους», χωρίς να τις αξιολογεί.
The model's explanation: Παρουσιάζει «Νέο πλαίσιο» που προβλέπει το πολυνομοσχέδιο του ΥΠΕΝ, χωρίς να αξιολογεί την κυβερνητική δράση.
2 of its 2 headlines on the story take this stance.
The model's explanation: Αναφέρει ότι το σχέδιο νόμου του ΥΠΕΝ είναι «Σε διαβούλευση» και περιγράφει τον σκοπό του, χωρίς αξιολογικό πλαίσιο.
2 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.