Version: 2.0 | Effective: 2026-05-06 | Classification: Public Subtitled: Narratives · Manipulation Vectors · Frame Lifecycles · Global Audience Orientation · Entman Functions · Cognitive Vulnerabilities · DISARM TTPs · CIB Signals · RRPA · Counter-Resilience
Template Purpose: Analyze how media coverage shapes and reflects European Parliament political dynamics across 27 member states and the global audience. Identifies framing patterns, influence operations, narrative-laundering chains, and democratic-resilience gaps with EU-specific institutional, linguistic, and geopolitical context.
Methodology: electoral-domain-methodology.md §Part 4 + analytical-supplementary-methodology.md §AS4
Min Lines: 270
| Element | Value | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| F3EAD Stage | ANALYZE → DISSEMINATE — media environment, manipulation surface, counter-resilience | osint-tradecraft-standards.md §F3EAD |
| PIRs Served | PIR-6 (Election Integrity), PIR-7 (Democratic Norms), PIR-8 (Foreign Influence), PIR-9 (Cognitive Security), PIR-10 (EU Institutional Legitimacy) | Run-level PIR register |
| Admiralty Floor | No outlet is "neutral" — Admiralty grade reflects process discipline only. Brussels bureaux ≥ B2; national quality ≥ C2 | osint-tradecraft-standards.md §Admiralty |
| WEP + ODNI | Frame-momentum claims use WEP bands; foreign-state attribution requires HIGH confidence + ≥3 independent indicators (ABCDE) | osint-tradecraft-standards.md §WEP |
| Source Diversity Floor | P2: ≥2 outlets from distinct MS/language; P1: ≥1 source per laundering-chain node; P0: ≥3 ABCDE indicators | This template §10 |
| SATs Applied | Outside-In Thinking, Indicators & Signposts, Red Cell, ACH (≥3 competing hypotheses), Premortem | osint-tradecraft-standards.md §SAT Catalog |
| ICD 203 Standards | 1 (Objectivity), 2 (Independence), 5 (Timeliness), 6 (Sourcing), 9 (Accuracy) | ODNI ICD 203 |
| Frameworks | Entman (1993) · DISARM · ABCDE (Camille François) · Wardle/Derakhshan · RAND Firehose · Lakoff · Cialdini · EU EEAS FIMI Framework | Academic + institutional references |
Five-Axis EU Political Alignment Key:
| Axis | Left/Pro-Integration Pole | Right/Sovereignty Pole |
|---|---|---|
| Economic | EU fiscal union, Eurobonds, common social floor | National fiscal sovereignty, austerity preference |
| Social-Identity | Cosmopolitan, open borders, LGBTQI+ protection | National identity, traditional values, migration restriction |
| EU Integration | Federal Europe, QMV expansion, EP powers | Intergovernmental, unanimity, national veto |
| Security-Defence | EU army, strategic autonomy, CSDP integration | NATO primacy, bilateral defence, US alignment |
| Media Ownership | Public-service plurality, DSA enforcement | Market-driven media, platform self-regulation |
| Region | Key Context for Frame Interpretation |
|---|---|
| EU Core (DE/FR/BE/NL/LU) | Federalist baseline; "eurosceptic" frames read as disruptive |
| Nordic (SE/DK/FI) | High press freedom; scepticism toward EU overreach + strong transparency norms |
| Southern (IT/ES/PT/GR) | Economic consequence frames dominate; EU-as-austerity narrative latent |
| Central-Eastern (PL/HU/CZ/SK/RO/BG) | Rule-of-law frames politically charged; V4 sovereignty narrative strong |
| Baltic (EE/LV/LT) | Security-first framing; Russia threat shapes all coverage |
| East Asia (JP/KR) | EU seen through trade + regulatory model lens; limited domestic coverage |
| Americas (US/CA/LATAM) | EU coverage via transatlantic relations + trade friction |
| Middle East / North Africa | EU-as-normative-actor; migration and neighbourhood policy focus |
# Media Framing Analysis: {TOPIC}
**ID:** FRM-YYYY-MM-DD-NNN
**Classification:** PUBLIC
**Date:** {ISO date}
**Subject:** {EP event/policy being analyzed}
**Coverage Period:** {Start date} to {End date}
**Horizon Band:** {Daily / Weekly / Monthly / Electoral cycle}
**Salience Tier:** {Tier 1 (crisis) / Tier 2 (significant) / Tier 3 (routine)}
**Save path:** analysis/daily/{date}/{slug}/extended/media-framing-analysis.md
**Source Scope:** EU-27 + UK + CH + EU-candidate states + international wire + state-affiliated
**Outlets Reviewed:** ≥15 (≥5 Brussels bureau + ≥5 national quality + ≥3 wire + ≥2 international)
**State-Affiliated Outlets Monitored:** RT/Sputnik (RU), CGTN/Xinhua (CN), PressTV (IR), TRT World (TR), Al Jazeera (QA) — flagged, not treated as neutralRequired: Mermaid graph showing identified frames with colour-coded nodes.
%%{init: {"theme":"dark","themeVariables":{"primaryColor":"#1565C0","primaryTextColor":"#ffffff","primaryBorderColor":"#0A3F7F","lineColor":"#90CAF9","secondaryColor":"#2E7D32","secondaryTextColor":"#ffffff","tertiaryColor":"#FF9800","tertiaryTextColor":"#000000"}}}%%
graph LR
A["Frame A: Integration-positive 🟢"]
B["Frame B: Sovereignty/opposition 🔴"]
C["Frame C: Establishment-consensus 🟡<br/>(NOT 'neutral')"]
D["Frame D: Public-service proceduralist 🟣<br/>(NOT 'impartial')"]
E["Frame E: Foreign/state-affiliated overlay ⚫<br/>(only if ≥1 CIB signal)"]
A -->|"contests"| B
B -->|"undermines"| A
C -->|"normalizes"| A
D -->|"legitimizes"| C
E -->|"amplifies"| B
style A fill:#2E7D32,stroke:#1B5E20,color:#FFFFFF
style B fill:#D32F2F,stroke:#B71C1C,color:#FFFFFF
style C fill:#FFC107,stroke:#F57F17,color:#000000
style D fill:#7B1FA2,stroke:#4A0072,color:#FFFFFF
style E fill:#212121,stroke:#000000,color:#FFFFFF
Frame discipline:
- Frame C is never labelled "neutral" — it reflects establishment consensus with its own structural biases
- Frame D is never labelled "impartial" — public broadcasters have process biases (status-quo proceduralism)
- Frame E is activated only when ≥1 CIB signal (§10) or state-affiliated outlet detected
Required: All 4 Entman (1993) framing functions per identified frame.
| Frame | Problem Definition | Causal Attribution | Moral Evaluation | Treatment Recommendation | Lead Messengers | Approx. Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frame A | {What is the problem?} | {Who/what caused it?} | {Why is it wrong/right?} | {What should be done?} | {Named outlets + political actors} | {%} |
| Frame B | {Problem definition} | {Causal attribution} | {Moral evaluation} | {Treatment} | {Messengers} | {%} |
| Frame C | {Problem definition} | {Causal attribution} | {Moral evaluation} | {Treatment} | {Messengers} | {%} |
| Frame D | {Problem definition} | {Causal attribution} | {Moral evaluation} | {Treatment} | {Messengers} | {%} |
| Frame E | {Only if activated} | {State-actor framing} | {Geopolitical framing} | {Disruption/division} | {State outlets} | {%} |
Required: Per-frame: bias exploited, mechanism, inoculation lever. Cite primary literature.
| Frame | Bias Exploited | Mechanism | Inoculation Lever | Primary Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frame A | {e.g., Authority bias} | {How the frame leverages this bias in EU institutional context} | {Counter-strategy} | {Cialdini 2021 / Kahneman 2011 / etc.} |
| Frame B | {e.g., Loss aversion} | {How sovereignty loss framing exploits this} | {Counter-strategy} | {Tversky & Kahneman 1981} |
| Frame C | {e.g., Status quo bias} | {How centrist consensus exploits inertia} | {Counter-strategy} | {Samuelson & Zeckhauser 1988} |
| Frame D | {e.g., Procedural justice} | {How process focus obscures substance} | {Counter-strategy} | {Tyler 2006} |
| Frame E | {e.g., Illusory truth} | {How repetition across platforms creates belief} | {Counter-strategy} | {Hasher et al. 1977 / Pennycook et al. 2018} |
Required: Map observed manipulation techniques to DISARM framework codes. "No-signal finding is also a finding" — explicitly document absence.
| DISARM TTP | Code | Observed? | Evidence (outlet, date, URL) | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flooding / information overload | T0049 | {YES/NO} | {Specific evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Amplify existing narrative | T0118 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Distort facts | T0023 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| AI-generated text | T0085 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| AI-generated images/deepfakes | T0088 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Astroturfing | T0086 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Impersonation | T0099 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Demand insincere apology | T0040 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Coordinated inauthentic behaviour | T0104 | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
No-signal attestation: If all rows read NO, explicitly state: "No manipulation indicators detected for this coverage period. Confidence: {H/M/L}. Basis: {methodology applied}."
Required: Map narrative flow from fringe to mainstream with EU-specific institutional amplification vectors.
%%{init: {"theme":"dark","themeVariables":{"primaryColor":"#1565C0","primaryTextColor":"#ffffff","primaryBorderColor":"#0A3F7F","lineColor":"#90CAF9"}}}%%
flowchart LR
F["🟤 Fringe<br/>(0–10k reach)<br/>Telegram channels<br/>Anonymous blogs"]
A["🟠 Alt-Media<br/>(10k–100k)<br/>Partisan sites<br/>Influencer accounts"]
P["🔴 Political Amplification<br/>(>100k)<br/>MEP social media<br/>EP group comms"]
M["🟡 Mainstream<br/>(1M+)<br/>Brussels bureau<br/>National press"]
I["🔵 International<br/>(10M+)<br/>Wire services<br/>Global broadcast"]
F -->|"seed"| A
A -->|"amplify"| P
P -->|"legitimize"| M
M -->|"normalize"| I
style F fill:#795548,stroke:#3E2723,color:#FFFFFF
style A fill:#FF9800,stroke:#E65100,color:#000000
style P fill:#D32F2F,stroke:#B71C1C,color:#FFFFFF
style M fill:#FFC107,stroke:#F57F17,color:#000000
style I fill:#1565C0,stroke:#0D47A1,color:#FFFFFF
| Stage | First Observed | Carrier | Reach | Admiralty Grade | Language |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fringe | {Date/time} | {Platform/channel} | {Est. reach} | {Grade} | {Language(s)} |
| Alt-media | {Date/time} | {Outlet/influencer} | {Est. reach} | {Grade} | {Language(s)} |
| Political amplification | {Date/time} | {MEP/group/account} | {Followers} | {Grade} | {Language(s)} |
| Mainstream | {Date/time} | {Outlet} | {Circulation} | {Grade} | {Language(s)} |
| International | {Date/time} | {Wire/broadcaster} | {Global reach} | {Grade} | {Language(s)} |
EU-specific amplification vectors:
- EP plenary speeches (via
get_speeches) — legislative record as legitimization - Written/oral questions (via
get_parliamentary_questions) — framing via scrutiny - EP resolution recitals — normative framing codified into official text
- Council Presidency communications — governmental-level amplification
- EEAS strategic communications — counter-narrative channel
"No outlet is neutral" doctrine. Every cited outlet receives a multi-dimensional assessment.
| Outlet | Type | Ownership | Funding Mix | Economic Axis | Social Axis | EU-Integration Axis | Security Axis | DSA Transparency | State-Actor Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Politico EU | Brussels Bureau | Axel Springer (DE) | Subscription + ads | Centre-right | Liberal | Pro-integration | Atlanticist | Compliant | None |
| EUobserver | Brussels Bureau | Non-profit (BE) | Grants + subscription | Centre-left | Progressive | Pro-integration | Multilateral | Compliant | None |
| Euractiv | Brussels Bureau | Mediahuis (BE) | Subscription + sponsored | Centre | Liberal | Pro-integration | Multilateral | Compliant | None |
| Reuters/AFP/DPA | Wire service | Various | Subscription | Neutral-market | Neutral | Neutral-reportage | Varied | Compliant | None |
| FAZ | National quality (DE) | FAZIT Foundation | Subscription + ads | Ordoliberal | Conservative-liberal | Cautious federalist | Atlanticist | Compliant | None |
| Le Monde | National quality (FR) | Donor consortium | Subscription + ads | Centre-left | Progressive | Pro-integration | Strategic autonomy | Compliant | None |
| Corriere della Sera | National quality (IT) | RCS (Cairo) | Subscription + ads | Centre | Moderate | Ambivalent | Atlanticist | Compliant | None |
| TVP Info | National broadcaster (PL) | State-funded | License fee + state | Varies with govt | Varies with govt | Govt-dependent | NATO + bilateral | Compliant | Indirect (state) |
| RT / Sputnik | State-affiliated (RU) | Russian state | State-funded | Anti-Western | Anti-liberal | Anti-EU | Anti-NATO | Sanctioned/banned | Direct |
| CGTN / Xinhua | State-affiliated (CN) | Chinese state | State-funded | State-capitalist | Authoritarian | Transactional | Non-aligned | Non-compliant | Direct |
Framework: ABCDE (Camille François 2019) — Actor / Behaviour / Content / Degree / Effect.
| Indicator | Signal | Observed? | Evidence | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Account-creation burst | >10 accounts within 48h with EP-topic focus | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Posting-time clustering | >60% posts within same 2h window across accounts | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Cross-platform identical phrasing | Same text across ≥3 platforms within 6h | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Spoof/impersonation | Accounts mimicking EP officials or institutions | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Hashtag co-occurrence anomaly | Same hashtag cluster ≥5× above baseline | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Bot-likelihood score | Botometer >0.7 or equivalent on ≥3 amplifiers | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
| Fake-engagement spike | Like/share ratio >10× organic baseline | {YES/NO} | {Evidence} | {H/M/L} |
EU-specific CIB channels: EP intergroup communications → Telegram → alt-media → mainstream cycle.
Required: Per-platform documented asymmetry with academic citations.
| Platform | Frame A Reach | Frame B Reach | Asymmetry Ratio | Optimization Target | Academic Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X (Twitter) | {Est.} | {Est.} | {Ratio} | Engagement (outrage-optimized) | Huszár et al. 2022 PNAS (right-amplification documented) |
| Facebook/Meta | {Est.} | {Est.} | {Ratio} | Engagement (out-group hostility) | Rathje, Van Bavel & van der Linden 2021 PNAS |
| TikTok | {Est.} | {Est.} | {Ratio} | Watch-time (novelty/controversy) | TikTok DSA Transparency Report 2024; Faddoul et al. 2023 |
| YouTube | {Est.} | {Est.} | {Ratio} | Watch-time (rabbit-hole) | Ribeiro et al. 2020 FAccT; Hosseinmardi et al. 2024 PNAS Nexus |
| Telegram | {Est.} | {Est.} | {Ratio} | None (unmoderated) | NATO StratCom COE 2023 |
| {Est.} | {Est.} | {Ratio} | Professional relevance | EU DSA Transparency Database 2025 |
EU-specific: DSA Article 40 allows researchers access to platform data. EP IMCO committee platform hearings provide institutional context.
Required: ≥2 prior-jurisdiction cognates per major frame. "Naivety check": if every cell reads "no cognate found" → redo analysis.
| Frame | Cognate 1 (jurisdiction, year) | Cognate 2 (jurisdiction, year) | Mechanism of Transfer | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frame A | {e.g., "More Europe" / Germany 2017} | {e.g., "En Marche" / France 2017} | {How the frame migrated to EU-level} | {H/M/L} |
| Frame B | {e.g., "Take back control" / UK 2016} | {e.g., "Sovereignty first" / Hungary 2018} | {Transfer mechanism} | {H/M/L} |
| Frame C | {e.g., "Responsible governance" / NL 2023} | {e.g., "Stability coalition" / DE 2021} | {Transfer mechanism} | {H/M/L} |
| Frame D | {e.g., "Process matters" / Nordic model} | {e.g., "Public interest broadcasting" / UK BBC} | {Transfer mechanism} | {H/M/L} |
| Frame E | {e.g., "Firehose of falsehood" / RU 2014} | {e.g., "Doppelganger" / EU-DisinfoLab 2022} | {Transfer mechanism} | {H/M/L} |
Required: Pattern-match observed framing against known public-domain information-influence doctrines.
| Doctrine Pattern | Source Reference | Signal in Current Coverage | Confidence | Time Since Last Observed in EU |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Firehose of falsehood | RAND PE-198-RC (2016) | {Evidence or "No signal"} | {H/M/L} | {Months/years} |
| Doppelganger operation | EU-DisinfoLab 2022 | {Evidence or "No signal"} | {H/M/L} | {Time} |
| Gish gallop (quantity overwhelms) | Rhetorical analysis | {Evidence or "No signal"} | {H/M/L} | {Time} |
| Reflexive control (Soviet/RU) | NATO StratCom COE | {Evidence or "No signal"} | {H/M/L} | {Time} |
| Active measures spillover | EEAS FIMI Reports 2023-2025 | {Evidence or "No signal"} | {H/M/L} | {Time} |
| Narrative capture (lobby) | Corporate Europe Observatory | {Evidence or "No signal"} | {H/M/L} | {Time} |
| Populist framing (EU as elite) | Mudde 2004 / Taggart 2000 | {Evidence or "No signal"} | {H/M/L} | {Time} |
Required: Track frame evolution over time with lifecycle metrics.
%%{init: {"theme":"dark","themeVariables":{"primaryColor":"#1565C0","primaryTextColor":"#ffffff"}}}%%
xychart-beta
title "Frame Intensity Over Time"
x-axis ["T-7d", "T-5d", "T-3d", "T-1d", "T", "T+3d", "T+7d", "T+14d", "T+30d", "T+90d"]
y-axis "Intensity (0-100)" 0 --> 100
line "Frame A" [10, 15, 25, 60, 85, 70, 50, 30, 15, 10]
line "Frame B" [20, 25, 40, 55, 75, 80, 65, 45, 30, 20]
line "Frame C" [40, 42, 45, 50, 55, 52, 48, 44, 42, 40]
| Frame | Estimated Peak | Half-Life (days) | Sleeper/Zombie Probability | Reactivation Trigger | Phase |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frame A | {Date} | {Days} | {LOW/MED/HIGH} | {What would reactivate} | {Rising/Peak/Declining/Dormant} |
| Frame B | {Date} | {Days} | {LOW/MED/HIGH} | {Trigger} | {Phase} |
| Frame C | {Date} | {Days} | {LOW/MED/HIGH} | {Trigger} | {Phase} |
Frame archaeology: For any frame with zombie probability ≥ MED, cite the historical precedent of reactivation.
Required: Composite impact score per frame: Reach × Resonance × Persistence × Action.
| Frame | Reach (0–100) | Resonance (0–100) | Persistence (0–100) | Action (0–100) | RRPA Composite | Dated Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frame A | {Score} | {Score} | {Score} | {Score} | {Composite} | {Poll / petition / protest / policy shift — with date} |
| Frame B | {Score} | {Score} | {Score} | {Score} | {Composite} | {Dated evidence} |
| Frame C | {Score} | {Score} | {Score} | {Score} | {Composite} | {Dated evidence} |
"Action conversion is the only honest measure of frame power." Each row MUST cite at least one dated real-world indicator (Eurobarometer poll movement, petition signatures, EP resolution amendment adoption, street demonstration attendance).
Required: Multi-layer resilience recommendations per frame, from proactive to reactive.
| Layer | Strategy | Application to Dominant Frame | EU Institutional Lever |
|---|---|---|---|
| L1 — Prebunking (proactive) | Inoculate before exposure | {How to pre-empt this frame} | EP INGE Committee reports; EUvsDisinfo |
| L2 — Inoculation (just-in-time) | Build resistance at first exposure | {Weakened dose of the frame} | EP press service factsheets |
| L3 — Lateral-reading prompt | Redirect to source verification | {Which sources to verify against} | DSA-mandated transparency tools |
| L4 — Debunking (truth-sandwich) | Correct after exposure (fact-first framing) | {Specific factual corrections} | EP Research Service (EPRS) publications |
| L5 — Algorithmic friction / DSA Art.40 | Reduce amplification | {Platform-level intervention} | DSA enforcement (DG CNECT); EDMO |
Required: Key quotes with manipulation flags.
| Quote | Speaker | Frame | Reach | Reusability | Manipulation Flag |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| "{Verbatim quote}" | {Named MEP/official} | {Frame A/B/C/D/E} | {Est. reach} | {HIGH/MED/LOW} | {✅ Verified / |
Required: Inter-frame relationship graph showing how frames interact.
%%{init: {"theme":"dark","themeVariables":{"primaryColor":"#1565C0","primaryTextColor":"#ffffff","primaryBorderColor":"#0A3F7F","lineColor":"#90CAF9"}}}%%
flowchart LR
A["Frame A 🟢"]
B["Frame B 🔴"]
C["Frame C 🟡"]
D["Frame D 🟣"]
E["Frame E ⚫"]
A -->|"contests"| B
B -->|"erodes"| A
C -->|"normalizes"| A
C -->|"legitimizes via process"| D
E -->|"amplifies"| B
B -->|"strengthens"| E
style A fill:#2E7D32,stroke:#1B5E20,color:#FFFFFF
style B fill:#D32F2F,stroke:#B71C1C,color:#FFFFFF
style C fill:#FFC107,stroke:#F57F17,color:#000000
style D fill:#7B1FA2,stroke:#4A0072,color:#FFFFFF
style E fill:#212121,stroke:#000000,color:#FFFFFF
| Interaction | Direction | Strength (WEP) | Mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|
| A ↔ B | Adversarial | {WEP band} | {How they contest each other} |
| C → A | Reinforcing | {WEP band} | {How establishment consensus supports integration} |
| E → B | Amplifying | {WEP band} | {How foreign framing boosts sovereignty narratives} |
Required: Day-by-day volume tracking by outlet category.
| Date | Brussels Bureau | Wire Services | National Quality | Tabloid/Popular | Public Broadcaster | Opinion/Commentary | State-Affiliated Foreign | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {Day 1} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} |
| {Day 2} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} |
| {Day 3} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} | {N} |
Required: Cross-national frame divergence analysis (≥5 member states).
| Dimension | Brussels Bureau Consensus | DE | FR | IT | PL | ES | Gap Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | {EU institutional} | {National angle} | {National angle} | {National angle} | {National angle} | {National angle} | {Divergence pattern} |
| Key Actors | {EP/Commission} | {National actors} | {National actors} | {National actors} | {National actors} | {National actors} | {Who dominates nationally} |
| Tone | {Assessment} | {Tone} | {Tone} | {Tone} | {Tone} | {Tone} | {Pattern} |
| Frame | {Dominant} | {Dominant} | {Dominant} | {Dominant} | {Dominant} | {Dominant} | {Variation} |
| Political Group | Response to Coverage | Adaptation Strategy | Frame Alignment |
|---|---|---|---|
| EPP | {Reactive / Proactive / Silent} | {What they did} | {Frame A/B/C} |
| S&D | {Response} | {Adaptation} | {Frame} |
| Renew | {Response} | {Adaptation} | {Frame} |
| Greens/EFA | {Response} | {Adaptation} | {Frame} |
| ECR | {Response} | {Adaptation} | {Frame} |
| PfE | {Response} | {Adaptation} | {Frame} |
| The Left | {Response} | {Adaptation} | {Frame} |
Required: Trigger events that would shift the framing landscape.
| Trigger Event | Likely Frame Shift | WEP Band | Time Horizon | Admiralty Grade | Monitoring Indicator |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {Specific event} | {Which frame gains/loses} | {WEP} | {Days/weeks} | {Grade} | {What to watch for} |
| {Event} | {Shift} | {WEP} | {Horizon} | {Grade} | {Indicator} |
| {Event} | {Shift} | {WEP} | {Horizon} | {Grade} | {Indicator} |
🎯 Section 22 — Personalization & Character-Attack Analysis (target = the ATTACK, never the private person)
ETHICAL FIREWALL — non-negotiable, Pass-2 blocking. This section analyzes the mechanics of a personal attack as a media-manipulation phenomenon. It does NOT profile, investigate, or repeat allegations about private individuals.
- Public officials are analyzable only in their official capacity (GDPR Art. 9(2)(e)/(g)).
- Private individuals — spouses, partners, children, named private citizens — are NEVER the analytical object. They appear only as the target of a documented attack, and only to expose the manipulation.
- Any unverified personal allegation is a manipulation datapoint to be flagged — NEVER a claim to be restated as fact. Repeat nothing; map the attack vector.
| Attack vector | Target class | Legitimate scrutiny OR smear? | Evidence (public URL / dated) | Manipulation technique | Private-individual shield applied? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Record/conduct in office | Public official (official capacity) | Legitimate if evidenced | [url] |
— (fair scrutiny) | N/A |
| Character / integrity smear | Public official | Smear if unevidenced | [url] |
T0023 Distort facts |
N/A |
| Family-member instrumentalization | Private individual (spouse/relative) | Smear — always | [url — the ATTACK, not the allegation] |
Guilt-by-association | ✅ shielded — not profiled |
| Gendered / sexualized attack | Public official + private | Smear | [url] |
T0048 Harass |
✅ if private target |
| Deepfake / synthetic media | Either | Smear | [url] |
T0088 AI-generated media |
✅ if private target |
flowchart LR
S1["🟢 L1 Legitimate scrutiny<br/>evidenced, official-capacity"] --> S2["🟡 L2 Character framing<br/>unevidenced integrity attack"]
S2 --> S3["🟠 L3 Guilt-by-association<br/>family/relationship weaponized"]
S3 --> S4["🔴 L4 Harassment / smear campaign<br/>coordinated, CIB signals"]
S4 --> S5["⚫ L5 Incitement / threat<br/>escalate to reporting note"]
style S1 fill:#4CAF50,color:#FFFFFF
style S2 fill:#FFC107,color:#000000
style S3 fill:#FB8C00,color:#FFFFFF
style S4 fill:#D32F2F,color:#FFFFFF
style S5 fill:#212121,color:#FFFFFF
- No outlet is "neutral" — every source receives multi-dimensional bias assessment (§9)
- No paywall bypass — only publicly accessible content or legitimate institutional subscriptions
- No private-account content — only public posts/statements from verified accounts
- EP MCP data is authoritative for parliamentary record; media coverage is analysed, not relied upon for facts
- State-affiliated sources are monitored for frame tracking but never cited as factual authority
get_speeches— plenary debate content (framing in legislative record)get_adopted_texts— resolution language analysis (frame codification)get_parliamentary_questions— scrutiny topics as political signalssearch_documents— committee reports and opinionsget_plenary_sessions— session context and agenda framing
| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|---|---|
| 2.0 | 2026-05-06 | MAJOR UPDATE: EU-adapted v2.0 from riksdagsmonitor v2.3 port. Added: Tradecraft Context, Template Contract, Global Audience Orientation, Entman functions, Cognitive Vulnerability Map, DISARM TTP Map, Narrative-Laundering Chain, Source Ecology/Outlet Bias Audit, CIB Signal Block, Algorithmic-Amplification Asymmetry, Comparative-International Frame Lineage, Strategic-Doctrine Detection, Frame Lifecycle/Longevity, RRPA Impact Conversion, Counter-Resilience Plan L1–L5, Quote Salience, Frame-Competition Dynamics, Coverage-Volume Dashboard, Forward Watchlist, Pass-2 Self-Audit Checklist. Adapted all sections for EU 27-MS context, EP political groups, DSA framework, and EEAS FIMI standards. |
| 1.0 | 2026-04-23 | Initial EU Parliament Monitor media framing template. |
- §2 Global Audience Orientation section present and populated for ≥5 regions
- 5-axis political alignment key applied (not single left/right score)
- ≥1 international frame-lineage note per identified frame (§12)
- No single "left/right" label without multi-axis breakdown
- No outlet labelled "neutral" or "impartial" without explicit bias-axis citation
- §9 Outlet Bias Audit table populated for every cited outlet (≥15 rows)
- Public-broadcaster/wire-service caveat present (process bias acknowledged)
- §11 Algorithmic-Amplification declares optimization target per platform
- Frame C is labelled "establishment-consensus" (NOT "neutral/centrist")
- Frame D is labelled "public-service proceduralist" (NOT "impartial")
- §1 Tradecraft Context block populated with F3EAD stage, PIRs, Admiralty floor, SATs, ICD 203
- Source diversity floor met: ≥15 outlets from ≥5 MS/languages
- Evidence specificity: every factual claim cites a specific EP MCP call or dated source
- Named-actor discipline: frames attributed to specific outlets/politicians, never vague "media says"
- §16 Counter-Resilience Plan populated at ≥3 of 5 layers
- EU institutional context integrated (DSA, EEAS FIMI, EP INGE Committee references)
- No illustrative/hypothetical content presented as observed fact
- Cross-references resolve to other artifacts in this run
- ≥1 Mermaid diagram matching front-matter mermaidType (graph LR)
- §5 Entman functions (all 4) populated per frame
- §6 Cognitive Vulnerability cites primary academic literature per bias
- §7 DISARM TTPs use verbatim DISARM codes (T-numbers)
- §8 Narrative-Laundering Chain complete (≥4 stages populated)
- §9 Source Ecology table ≥10 outlets with ownership + 5-axis assessment
- §10 CIB ABCDE indicators: all 7 rows assessed (YES/NO with evidence or no-signal attestation)
- §11 Algorithmic-Amplification cites ≥3 academic sources (PNAS, FAccT, etc.)
- §12 Comparative-International: ≥2 cognates per major frame (naivety check passed)
- §13 Strategic-Doctrine Detection: ≥5 doctrines assessed with signal/no-signal
- §14 Frame Lifecycle: xychart with ≥8 time points, half-life, zombie probability
- §15 RRPA composite with dated real-world indicator per frame
- §18 Frame-Competition Dynamics Mermaid + WEP-confidence interactions
- §19 Coverage-Volume Dashboard: day-by-day multi-category volume
- Frame E discipline: activated ONLY with ≥1 CIB signal or state-affiliated source detected
Template version 2.0 — EU Parliament Monitor Media Framing & Influence-Operations Analysis Next review: 2026-08-01