O Globo · June 2026

• Uses neutral verbs like 'assinam', 'diz', 'escolhe' without evaluative adjectives
• Frames Trump administration actions as news events, not as threats or triumphs
• Occasionally highlights Brazilian concerns (tariffs, sanctions) but without hostile language toward the US
• Includes both positive (peace deal, Air Force One) and negative (tariff pressure, espionage) items

Coverage is mixed: some headlines report US actions neutrally (peace deal, ambassador pick), others note friction with Brazil (tariffs, sanctions) but without overt hostility. The outlet does not consistently lionize or delegitimize the US; stance is essentially balanced, hence 0 with low confidence due to small sample and varied topics.

• Uses neutral verbs for Trump's actions but highlights controversies and reactions
• Frames Trump's policies as threats or problems (tariffs, muro, ICE, sanctions)
• Includes critical responses from other leaders (Lula, Macron) without endorsing Trump
• Notes internal and judicial setbacks (judge ruling, court suspension)

Coverage is largely factual and balanced, but selection emphasizes Trump's contentious moves and opposition to him, suggesting a mildly critical stance. Some headlines (e.g., 3, 9, 13) report his actions neutrally or even positively, so stance is not strongly negative.

• Foregrounds legal setbacks and investigations against Bolsonaro family members
• Uses verbs like 'cometeu', 'condena', 'arquiva' that highlight wrongdoing or failure
• Frames Bolsonaro as a political liability or target of institutional actions
• Occasionally neutral reporting of political moves, but selection skews negative

Bundle focuses heavily on Flávio Bolsonaro rather than Jair; many headlines are factual reports of legal/political events, but the outlet's selection emphasizes negative outcomes (conviction, calumny finding, TCU archiving). Some headlines (e.g., 13, 21) report Bolsonaro's own statements without overt editorializing, but overall the framing is skeptical/critical toward the Bolsonaro family.

• Reports Lula's actions and statements without overt editorializing
• Includes both favorable and unfavorable items (e.g., PF clearing Lula vs. congressional defeats)
• Uses direct quotes from Lula and allies, but also quotes critics
• Focuses on political strategy and internal dynamics rather than personal evaluation

Coverage is largely factual and balanced, mixing positive developments (e.g., PF conclusion, TSE ruling) with negative ones (e.g., congressional defeats, criticism from Zema). Some headlines quote Lula's own attacks on others (e.g., Trump, Rubio) but the outlet itself does not adopt a stance toward Lula. No consistent evaluative language for or against Lula.

• Balanced reporting on both Lula and Bolsonaro figures
• Uses neutral verbs like 'diz', 'reage', 'critica' without strong evaluative adjectives
• Foregrounds political strategy and legal maneuvers rather than moral judgment
• Occasional framing of Lula's actions as calculated ('estratégia', 'cálculo')

Bundle covers multiple actors (Lula, Flávio, Bolsonaro family, STF) with no consistent stance toward any single entity; headlines are largely factual and strategic. Some headlines imply skepticism of Lula's political calculations (e.g., #9, #18), but not enough to mark a clear negative stance. Entity 'BR' is treated as a neutral backdrop; no celebratory or hostile language.

• Uses neutral verbs like 'diz', 'defende', 'reage' without strong evaluative adjectives
• Reports both positive and negative developments (campaign strategy, family crises, legal troubles)
• Occasionally highlights controversies ('caso Dark Horse', 'caluniou Lula') without editorializing
• Frames Flávio as a political actor among others, not as hero or villain

Coverage is mixed: some headlines report Flávio's statements and campaign moves neutrally (e.g., #3, #5), while others note legal setbacks and internal family conflicts (e.g., #22, #21). The outlet does not consistently praise or attack Flávio; it presents him as a contested candidate. The entity's own aggressive rhetoric toward Lula is reported without the outlet endorsing or condemning it, so stance toward Flávio remains neutral.