Loading...
Associated Press · January 2026
January 2026 editorial profile for Associated Press. Below: how this outlet framed the actors and regions it covered most in January 2026. Tap any tile to jump to the detailed card.
United States25 titles-1Skeptical“critical of US government actions”
Patterns
- foregrounds harm caused by US federal agents
- uses distancing verbs for US official statements
- highlights legal and ethical controversies
- reports on US government failures and conflicts
Caveats
The outlet reports on US government actions critically, but also includes neutral factual coverage (e.g., weather, business deals). The negative stance is toward the US government's policies and actions, not the country as a whole; some headlines are neutral or positive toward other entities.
Representative headlines
TRUMP25 titles-1Skeptical“critical and skeptical”
Patterns
- highlights false claims and scrutiny
- frames actions as facing hurdles, revolt, or pushback
- uses distancing or critical verbs like 'faces scrutiny', 'suggests', 'backs off'
- foregrounds negative consequences and opposition
Caveats
Coverage is consistently skeptical, often highlighting failures, controversies, and opposition to Trump's actions, but stops short of outright hostile language; the outlet maintains a factual tone while selecting critical angles.
Venezuela23 titles-2Adversarial“consistently hostile and delegitimizing”
Patterns
- frames Maduro as a captured criminal defendant
- uses distancing and delegitimizing language ('ousted', 'topples', 'capture')
- highlights negative consequences and legal challenges for Maduro
- quotes Maduro only in context of his arrest and plea
Caveats
The outlet's stance is toward Nicolás Maduro as the entity VE (Venezuela's leader). Coverage is uniformly negative, treating him as a captured drug trafficking defendant, with no sympathetic or authoritative framing. Headlines emphasize his ouster, legal troubles, and the US action against him.
GL20 titles0Reportorial“neutral reporting of geopolitical conflict”
Patterns
- reports Trump's actions and statements without evaluative framing toward GL
- quotes Danish and European officials' opposition without endorsing either side
- uses neutral terms like 'takeover call', 'threats', 'aggressions' as reported speech
- focuses on strategic and economic implications rather than GL's agency or character
Caveats
The outlet does not take a stance toward Greenland as an entity; coverage is about the dispute between the US and Denmark/Greenland. Greenland is treated as a passive object of geopolitical competition, not as an actor with its own voice. No evaluative language toward Greenland itself appears.