Times of India · Februar 2026

• Quotes Modi's own statements without distancing verbs
• Foregrounds diplomatic achievements and honours
• Uses respectful titles and positive framing
• Includes opposition attacks but does not adopt their critical language

Headlines 8, 9, 17, 23, 25 report opposition criticism, but the outlet itself does not endorse that criticism; the overall selection emphasises Modi's diplomatic activity and accolades, with neutral or positive framing of his actions.

• Quotes Trump's threats and warnings without evaluative framing
• Reports Trump's actions and deals factually
• Occasional negative framing via selection (pardoned rioter, tariff defeat)
• Uses Trump's own aggressive language in headlines

Coverage is largely factual and mixed: some headlines report Trump's deals and statements neutrally (7, 13), while others highlight setbacks or controversies (3, 23). The outlet does not consistently praise or condemn Trump, but the selection of negative stories (pardoned criminal, tariff defeat) slightly tilts the overall impression. No strong editorial stance toward Trump is evident.

• quotes PM Modi as authoritative voice on international deals and achievements
• foregrounds PM Modi's diplomatic wins and honours
• uses celebratory language for India's sports and cultural successes
• frames India as a proactive global player

The outlet treats India (IN) positively, especially through PM Modi's actions and statements, but some headlines report neutral or critical events (e.g., electoral roll shrinkage, stock selloff) without evaluative language toward the country itself.

• factual reporting of US actions and statements
• quotes from US officials without evaluative adjectives
• mix of positive and negative contexts (tech wins, political controversies)
• no consistent editorial voice toward the US as an entity

Coverage is diverse across US government, companies, and individuals; no unified stance. Headlines range from neutral reporting (Apple, Google) to quoting Trump's threats (negative content but not outlet's stance). The outlet does not consistently frame the US positively or negatively.

• foregrounds military strikes and leadership deaths
• uses 'regime' and 'warning' language
• quotes threats from Iran but with distancing verbs
• highlights geopolitical consequences and vulnerabilities

Headlines 13 and 19 show neutral/cooperative coverage (Chabahar port, drills with Russia), but the majority focus on US-Israel attacks, Khamenei's death, and Iran's threats, creating an overall skeptical stance toward the Iranian government.