Loading...
The Telegraph · February 2026
February 2026 editorial profile for The Telegraph. Below: how this outlet framed the actors and regions it covered most in February 2026. Tap any tile to jump to the detailed card.
United Kingdom25 titles0Reportorial“mixed, with critical focus on government figures”
Patterns
- negative framing of Labour government and Starmer
- critical coverage of Epstein-related scandals involving UK figures
- neutral or factual references to Britain as a country
- occasional positive framing of British historical achievements
Caveats
The entity is GB (country), not a specific government or person. Coverage is mixed: some headlines are critical of the UK government (Starmer, Labour) and scandals (Epstein), but others are neutral or positive about Britain's history (Trafalgar review). The stance toward the country itself is neutral overall, as the outlet's criticism targets political actors rather than the nation.
TRUMP25 titles-1Skeptical“critical but not uniformly hostile”
Patterns
- highlights Trump's threats and aggressive actions
- frames Trump's policies as chaotic or failing
- uses neutral or positive framing in some headlines about Trump's leadership
- includes headlines that associate Trump with controversial figures or events
Caveats
Headline 2 is clearly positive toward Trump, and several others (e.g., 3, 12) are neutral or mixed, but the majority of headlines focus on Trump's threats, failures, and controversies, giving an overall skeptical tone.
United States25 titles-1Skeptical“critical but not uniformly hostile”
Patterns
- foregrounds negative consequences of Trump's actions
- uses distancing verbs like 'threaten' and 'plunged into chaos'
- highlights domestic and international criticism of US policy
- mixes neutral reporting with evaluative framing
Caveats
The bundle includes some neutral or positive headlines (e.g., 11, 9) but the majority focus on negative impacts, scandals, and criticism of US actions under Trump. The entity is 'US' but coverage centers on Trump administration; stance reflects skepticism toward current US leadership rather than the country as a whole.
Representative headlines
STARMER21 titles-1Skeptical“critical and skeptical”
Patterns
- personal humiliation and disaster framing
- accusations of misleading and refusal to disclose
- negative consequences attributed to Starmer's decisions
- speculation about electoral defeat and weakness
Caveats
Headline 14 offers a rare positive speculation, and headline 3 and 17 are neutral or sympathetic personal stories, but the overwhelming majority are critical, focusing on failures, scandals, and predicted downfall. The outlet's own vocabulary ('humiliation', 'disaster', 'misled', 'betrayal', 'arrogance') consistently frames Starmer negatively.
Representative headlines
- →Starmer’s personal humiliation is a disaster for the Labour Party
- →Labour misled MPs over Starmer’s work with disgraced lawyer
- →The constitutional showdown that could finish Keir Starmer
- →Starmer’s Chagos deal descends into chaospt
- →Starmer faces crisis as Labour falls to third in by-election results
- →Starmer will be sent packing by a White House sick of his arrogance
EPSTEIN19 titles-2Adversarial“consistently hostile and delegitimising”
Patterns
- exposes Epstein's secretive and criminal activities
- associates Epstein with powerful figures in a scandalous light
- uses language of concealment, manipulation, and wrongdoing
- frames Epstein as a central figure in a web of corruption and abuse
Caveats
The outlet's stance is uniformly negative, treating Epstein as a criminal and manipulator. Headlines that quote others (e.g., Andrew, Clinton) do not shift the stance toward Epstein; they further implicate him in wrongdoing.
Representative headlines