Gazeta.ru · February 2026

• Quoting Zelensky's statements with distancing or negative framing
• Highlighting Zelensky's failures, contradictions, or forced apologies
• Amplifying third-party criticism of Zelensky
• Using verbs like 'занизил' (understated), 'пришлось извиняться' (had to apologize), 'пожаловался' (complained)

The outlet is Russian state-affiliated (Gazeta.ru), and the coverage consistently frames Zelensky as unreliable, weak, or hostile, while also quoting him extensively. The negative stance is clear but not extreme (-2) because some headlines are neutral factual reports of his statements.

• Quoting Russian officials as authoritative voices
• Foregrounding Russian strength and warnings
• Using neutral or positive framing for Russian actions
• Minimal critical distance in reporting

The outlet consistently amplifies Russian official statements without skepticism, treating them as credible sources. Headlines about domestic enforcement (e.g., arrests) are reported factually without negative framing toward the state. The entity is the country RU, and coverage is uniformly supportive or neutral, never critical.

• portrays Zelensky as evasive or dishonest
• highlights Ukrainian losses and failures
• uses distancing or critical framing of Ukrainian actions
• amplifies Russian official statements as authoritative

The outlet consistently frames Ukrainian leadership (especially Zelensky) as unreliable, exaggerating, or under pressure, while Russian officials are quoted without such skepticism. Headline 17 explicitly calls for Zelensky's surrender, showing extreme hostility. However, some headlines are neutral factual reports, and the entity is 'UA' (country), not just Zelensky; the stance toward Ukraine as a whole is negative but not uniformly hostile.

• predominantly factual reporting of US actions and statements
• occasional negative framing via Russian official quotes
• no consistent evaluative language toward the US as an entity

The bundle focuses heavily on Trump and US foreign policy actions, but the outlet's own voice is largely neutral; negative framing appears only when quoting Russian officials (e.g., Zakharova, Sikorski). The entity 'US' is not consistently treated positively or negatively by the outlet itself.

• Putin is shown as a proactive leader giving orders and praise
• Putin's statements are reported without distancing or skepticism
• Putin is quoted directly and his words are treated as newsworthy and wise
• Negative framing of Putin appears only in attributed quotes from foreign leaders

Headlines 3, 12, 22, 24 contain negative or skeptical framing of Putin, but these are attributed to third parties (Ukraine, Finland, Epstein, Zelensky) and not the outlet's own voice. The outlet's own headlines consistently present Putin as a respected authority figure.

• Trump quoted directly as a decision-maker and initiator
• Headlines present Trump's actions and statements as newsworthy without evaluative framing
• Occasional critical quotes from third parties (Clinton, Norway PM) but not endorsed by outlet
• No distancing verbs like 'claims' or 'alleges' in outlet's own voice

The outlet treats Trump as a credible actor whose statements and actions are reported straightforwardly; third-party criticisms (headlines 10, 24) are attributed to others, not the outlet's own stance. The overall framing is neutral-positive, as Trump is consistently positioned as a key player whose moves matter.

• No evaluative language toward the entity
• Entity appears only in context of third-party statements or events
• Headlines are descriptive, not opinionated
• No consistent positive or negative framing of the entity

The entity 'AE' (United Arab Emirates) is mentioned only as a location for negotiations (Abu Dhabi). No headlines express stance toward the country itself; coverage is purely factual and event-based.

• reports UN actions and statements without evaluative framing
• quotes multiple national representatives without favoring any
• includes factual errors and procedural news without commentary
• covers UN as a venue for diplomacy, not as an actor with its own stance

The outlet treats the UN as a neutral institutional backdrop; coverage is factual and procedural. No consistent positive or negative framing toward the UN itself. Headline 15 includes an error report but is presented neutrally.