Asahi Shimbun · September 2026

• Straight news reporting of domestic policy and economic events (BOJ rate hike, tax cuts, price increases) without evaluative language toward Japan
• Critical coverage of specific institutions (companies, politicians, bureaucrats) rather than of the country itself
• Editorial advocacy for diplomatic dialogue with China framed as a national interest, not as praise or blame of Japan
• Selection emphasises concrete societal problems (disaster housing, price hikes, labour violations) — descriptive, not delegitimising of the state

The entity is a country, not a person or organisation; most headlines are routine domestic news where the outlet's stance toward 'Japan' is not directly expressed. Critical items target sub-entities (companies, officials, parties), not the country as such. The editorial (idx 9) urges dialogue with China, which is a policy preference rather than a stance toward Japan. Overall coverage is mixed and primarily factual, so stance=0 with low confidence is appropriate.

• Editorial voice frames Trump administration actions as arbitrary and exclusionary ('恣意的な選別', '排除', '記者証没収')
• Scare-quote / ironic framing of Trump's self-presentation ('米の黄金時代', 'トランプ祭り', '国賓'異例の厚遇)
• Selection foregrounds norm-breaking and confrontation: ICC withdrawal, trade war escalation, climate rollback, press suppression
• Distancing attribution for contested claims ('SNSで主張', '報道も') rather than authoritative endorsement

Coverage is largely factual reporting of Trump's diplomatic activity (US-China summit, UNGA speech, bilateral meetings) and some headlines are neutral or even note 'good talks' in Trump's own words. The negative stance is driven mainly by Asahi's editorial/opinion pieces and its selection of norm-eroding stories; straight-news items are more mixed. No consistent -2 hostility, hence -1.

• Frames Trump-era US as disruptive to international order ('力'の秩序、きしむ国連; 米NSC、崩壊させた)
• Highlights US democratic backsliding and press suppression (ホワイトハウス締め出し; 記者証没収; 法廷闘争)
• Uses ironic/scornful framing of Trump's self-promotion (「トランプ祭り」; 「米の黄金時代」; SNSで主張)
• Reports US-China rapprochement as a risk to Japan (米中接近、日本どうする?; 日本のリスクに)

Coverage is largely about the Trump administration rather than the US as a whole; some headlines are neutral/factual (e.g., Apple, Docomo, US-China AI talks). The negative stance is directed at US political leadership and its foreign policy, not necessarily the country or its people. The entity's quoted content (e.g., Trump calling strikes 'justified') is reported with distancing, reinforcing skepticism.

• Neutral diplomatic reporting of Xi's US visit and Wang Yi talks, using honorifics and factual attribution
• Occasional critical framing of China's regional posture ('軍国主義'発言, 台湾 independence demands, BYD anxiety in Hungary)
• Selection highlights both China's diplomatic wins (厚遇, 首脳会談) and friction points (Taiwan, Japan risk)
• Editorial voice calls for dialogue resumption with China, mildly positive toward engagement

Coverage is genuinely mixed: some headlines report Xi's warm reception and diplomatic engagement neutrally or even positively, while others foreground Chinese pressure on Taiwan, military rhetoric, and regional anxiety. No consistent hostile or promotional stance toward China as an entity; the outlet's own evaluative voice is limited, mostly factual. Stance=0 reflects this balance.

• Critical framing of PM's priorities: '米国最優先' (US-first) and '首相のこだわり' (PM's personal insistence) used to question judgment
• Accountability reporting on scandals and failures: '裏金関与では初入閣 1746万円不記載' and '高市氏ますます国会に出なくなる'
• Skeptical analysis of symbolic milestones: '初の女性首相誕生、それでもジェンダーギャップ指数が改善しないわけ'
• Neutral-to-positive coverage of diplomatic actions: '電話協議', '国連総会出席' reported factually without evaluative language

Coverage is mixed: some headlines are neutral factual reports of PM's diplomatic and administrative actions (e.g., phone talks, budget decisions), while others are critical or skeptical. The outlet does not use consistently hostile language, but its own evaluative framing in several pieces questions the PM's priorities and accountability. The entity is sometimes quoted authoritatively (e.g., '受け入れられない'), but the outlet's overall stance is mildly critical rather than supportive.