How the Power Accountability Matrix Works
The Power Accountability Matrix measures whether powerful entities — politicians, corporations, government bodies — receive media scrutiny proportional to their influence. Our AI identifies articles containing accountability indicators like corruption allegations, policy criticism, and legal issues, then compares this ratio against total coverage.
Accountability Score
Each entity receives a score measuring how much scrutiny they face relative to their media presence. High coverage but low accountability suggests favorable treatment — the entity gets press without being questioned.
Cross-Source Comparison
Different outlets hold different entities accountable. One source may aggressively question the ruling party while giving the opposition a pass, and vice versa. This tool reveals those patterns across 50+ Indian news sources.
Methodology: How the Accountability Matrix Works
The Power Accountability Matrix identifies articles that contain accountability-related content and measures each entity's accountability rate against the media-wide baseline. This reveals which public figures receive disproportionate scrutiny and which appear to receive favourable, unquestioning coverage.
Accountability Indicators
Our system scans articles for nine categories of accountability content: abuse of power, financial misconduct, rights violations, cover-ups, electoral issues, systemic failures, public safety concerns, environmental violations, and sexual misconduct. Each indicator is detected using trained classifiers that identify relevant language patterns, allegations, and investigative framing within article text.
Accountability Rate
For each entity (politician, organisation, business leader), we calculate the percentage of articles that contain accountability indicators. This accountability rate is then compared against the baseline rate across all news coverage. An entity whose accountability rate significantly exceeds the baseline is receiving heightened scrutiny. An entity whose rate falls well below the baseline may be receiving favourable treatment.
Asymmetry Score (Scrutiny Score)
The scrutiny score quantifies how much more or less accountability coverage an entity receives compared to the average. A positive score means the entity faces more scrutiny than typical; a negative score means the entity gets relatively less questioning coverage. This metric is normalised so that scores can be compared across entities regardless of total article volume.
How to Interpret the Results
Understanding the Metrics
Each entity card displays three key metrics. The Scrutiny Score (red when positive, green when negative) shows whether the entity faces more or less accountability coverage than average. The Tone metric (0-100) indicates how positive or negative the overall coverage is, with values below 40 indicating negative coverage, 40-60 neutral, and above 60 positive. The Political indicator shows the political lean of the sources covering the entity, revealing whether scrutiny comes primarily from left-leaning, right-leaning, or balanced sources.
Reading the Indicator Breakdown
Below each entity's summary, a grid shows the count of articles flagged for each of the nine accountability indicators. Red-highlighted cells indicate categories where accountability content was detected. This breakdown reveals the nature of scrutiny: an entity might face primarily financial accountability coverage while receiving little scrutiny on public safety issues. Comparing indicator patterns across entities highlights the media's accountability priorities and blind spots.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Power Accountability Matrix?
It measures how much scrutiny powerful entities receive relative to their influence. We track accountability indicators like corruption coverage, public safety issues, and government criticism to see who gets questioned vs. who gets a free pass.
Why do some politicians avoid media scrutiny?
Media scrutiny varies based on political alignment of outlets, advertising relationships, ownership patterns, and access journalism. Our matrix reveals these patterns by comparing coverage across sources - showing who's held accountable and who isn't.
How do you calculate the accountability score?
We identify articles containing accountability indicators (corruption allegations, policy criticism, legal issues) and measure their ratio against total coverage. High coverage but low accountability suggests favorable treatment.