The degree to which New Zealand political parties, coalitions, or governments pursue policies or positions that are inconsistent with their stated platforms, voter expectations, or the broader strategic interests of their electoral base.
How the framings classify across 6 articles. Each framing is labelled by a small AI stance classifier; see the methodology page for details.
Up to 12 framings across outlets and orientations — each a short phrase the extractor generated to characterise the piece's editorial angle (not a quote). Filter by lean to see how each bloc is spinning the story; click through to read the original.
dissatisfaction versus enthusiasm confusion
Democracy Briefing: Labour’s warm-up should be overa failure of internal planning and predictability
Viva la Luxon: How the prime minister survived the coupLobby groups, unions, think tanks and industry bodies whose own releases or whose people’s media appearances touched this topic over the last 12 months. Owned = their own press releases; earned = their people quoted across radio, press & commentary. A card carried in both — with the release coming first — is the agenda-setting signal. Co-occurrence isn’t proof a group drove the coverage.
candidates prioritizing optics over substance
Stacked weekly counts; colour by lean. “n/a” covers government and iwi-Māori sources where lean isn't applicable.
How this topic has been named, week by week. A new alias winning out is usually a framing shift.
Social-media signal on the same topic, drawn from the social lens. Engagement is likes + 2×shares + 3×replies, the same weighting used across the digest cards. View on /social →
Spotted something wrong on this page? Report a correction.
